Alarm over Iran helps Bush

LA Times ^ | March 7, 2007 | Max Boot

[nuconvert]

Alarm over Iran helps Bush

The U.S. has plenty of reasons to strike, but the administration pushes diplomacy.

March 7, 2007

IS THAT trigger-happy gunslinger in the White House about to take aim at Iran?

You would think so if you read the Guardian newspaper in Britain, which has written, "Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear sites are well advanced."

Not to be outdone, the competing Sunday Times has reported, based on a "source with close ties to British intelligence," that "up to five [U.S.] generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack."

Or try the homegrown media, where foreign policy experts of an anti-Bush hue compete to offer elaborate scenarios of how the U.S. could spark a conflagration. American policymakers "intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something [the U.S.] would be forced to retaliate for," former National Security Council official Hillary Mann told Newsweek. Another former NSC aide, Flynt Leverett, told the New Yorker, "The idea is that at some point the Iranians will respond, and then the administration will have an open door to strike them." In Senate testimony, former national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski conjured up a "plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran," which would be provoked by a "terrorist act" that would be "blamed on Iran," "culminating in a 'defensive' U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire."

You would think that the United States was Nazi Germany preparing to launch a war of aggression on Poland based on a fabricated provocation. (Adolf Hitler's Sept. 1, 1939, blitzkrieg was preceded by SS troops in Polish uniforms pretending to attack a German radio station on the border.)

[nuconvert]

pong

[GSlob]

As if a pretext were needed.

[jws3sticks]

...if you read the Guardian newspaper in Britain

Never read the Guardian newspaper, they are total A$$holes and can't remember they'd be speaking German if it was not for the US of A. They are total snakes in the grass, in my opinion.

[Mr. Jeeves]

Alarm over Iran helps Bush

Thus, concludes the liberal, the alarm isn't based on anything real, but is merely a tactic to gain political advantage.

Because that's what the liberal would do.

[carolinalivin]

Alternate headline: Iran Threat Increases, Thank God Bush is President.

[LaineyDee]

"up to five [U.S.] generals and admirals are willing to resign rather than approve what they consider would be a reckless attack."

Hmm....Let me find that pen.....

[Redbob]

"You would think that the United States was Nazi Germany preparing to launch a war of aggression on Poland based on a fabricated provocation. (Adolf Hitler's Sept. 1, 1939, blitzkrieg was preceded by SS troops in Polish uniforms pretending to attack a German radio station on the border.)"

Or so the media tells us

From what I've seen lately, I sometimes wonder if the Germans were really to blame?

Consider Slobodan Milosevic, who our media painted as the worst villain since Adolph Hitler: his crime?
Rounding up Islamic terrorists that infested his country and were murdering non-muslims...

[ohioWfan]

AMEN to that!

[baubau]

I'm sure we will find a reason to strike once again.

[jveritas]

Amen CL :)

[happygrl]

Only if the Iranians fear the U.S. are they likely to make major concessions. The Bush haters are thus doing Bush a big favor with all their talk of an imminent American strike. The more alarmism, the better — justified or not.

Tick....tick.....tick....

[Brad from Tennessee]

Shortly after Ronald Reagan won the presidential election in 1980 he leaked to columnist Jack Anderson his plan to attack Iran after he took office in January 1981. Anderson reported that Reagan said the American hostages being held in Tehran were expendable. The U.S. would target Iranian military and industrial targets with conventional missiles launched from ships. The Iranians released the hostages the day Reagan was sworn into office

[Dave Elias]

"...can't remember they'd be speaking German if it was not for the US of A"

I'm sure many Brits would take exception to this...

[Valin]

Also I recall reading that Khomeini hated Carter and wanted to embarass him by waiting until he was out of office to return the hostages

[Brad from Tennessee]

[. . .reading that Khomeini hated Carter and wanted to embarrass him by waiting until he was out of office to return the hostages. . .]

The Ayatollah timed the release to cruelly deprive Carter of any glory. But the Iranians also adhered to the timetable that returned the hostages into American hands or a war would be imminent.

[Cindy]

I'm outraged and I DO NOT read the Los Angeles Times.
Period.

(As an aside, Zarqawi used to read the Los Angeles Times. I don't know if Hell subcribes to it, so unsure if he still does.)

---

http://internet-haganah.com/harchives/005285.html

19 November 2005
"Zarqawi: 'I read it in the Los Angeles Times'"

http://internet-haganah.com/hmedia/19nov05-zarqawi-latimes.mp3