Posted on 04/15/2008 4:39:07 AM PDT by nuconvert
Source: U.S. Strike on Iran Nearing
April 14, 2008
By: Jim Meyers
Contrary to some claims that the Bush administration will allow diplomacy to handle Iran’s nuclear weapons program, a leading member of America’s Jewish community tells Newsmax that a military strike is not only on the table – but likely.
“Israel is preparing for heavy casualties,” the source said, suggesting that although Israel will not take part in the strike, it is expecting to be the target of Iranian retribution.
“Look at Dick Cheney’s recent trip through the Middle East as preparation for the U.S. attack,” the source said.
Cheney’s hastily arranged 9-day visit to the region, which began on March 16, included stops in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, Turkey, and the Palestinian territories.
Tensions in the region have been rising.
While Israel was conducting the largest homefront military exercises in its history last week, Israel’s National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer warned Tehran about expected attacks on the Jewish state.
“An Iranian attack will prompt a severe reaction from Israel, which will destroy the Iranian nation,” he said.
He predicted that in a future war, “hundreds of missiles will rain on Israel,” but added that Iran “is definitely aware of our strength.”
In addition to long-range missiles Iran has been developing to strike Israel, Israel’s military strategists see the Iranians using terror groups they back like Hamas operating from Palestine and Hezbollah from Lebanon to launch attacks.
Iran has supplied Hezbollah with an arsenal that now contains “tens of thousands of missiles,” according to the Washington Post.
IIsrael’s recent war exercises, including preparations for chemical and biological weapons attacks, drew a sharp response from Syria which held its own military drills. The Syrian government accused Israel of preparing for a war which Damascus predicted would be begin anytime between May 1 and the end of June.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently told foreign journalists that Israel needs to confront the threat posed by Iran. Privately he has been telling associates his number one priority is have the Israeli military strike Iran if the U.S. is unwilling.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz disclosed that Israel is concerned that North Korea has transferred technology and nuclear materials to Iran to aid Tehran’s secret nuclear weapons program.
Iran remains intransigent to international pressure that it offer full transparency relating to its nuclear program. On Sunday the head of Iran’s nuclear program “abruptly canceled a meeting with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, dealing a blow to the U.N. monitor's efforts to investigate allegations that Iran tried to make nuclear arms, an agency official said,” according to an AP report.
“But a senior diplomat had told the AP that IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] head Mohamed ElBaradei likely planned to use the meeting with Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's nuclear program, to renew a request for more information on allegations Tehran had tried to make atomic arms.”
A number of signs indicate that, contrary to the belief President Bush is a lame duck who will not act before he leaves office, the U.S. is poised to strike before Iran can acquire nuclear weapons and carry out the threat of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to “wipe Israel off the map”:
According to intelligence sources, the administration now rejects the National Intelligence Estimate report issued in December that asserted Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in late 2003.
The French daily Le Monde reported in March that newly surfaced documents show that Iran has continued developing nuclear weapons. In late 2006, U.S. intelligence reportedly intercepted a phone conversation in Iran’s Defense Ministry in which the nuclear weapons program was discussed.
The commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, Admiral William Fallon, resigned in March amid media reports that he broke with President Bush’s strategy on Iran and did not want to be in the chain of command when the order comes down from the President to launch a strike on the Islamic Republic.
Democrats suggested he had been forced out because of his candor in opposing Bush’s Iran plans, and Esquire magazine contended that Fallon’s departure signaled that the U.S. is preparing to attack Iran.
According to a Tehran-based Iranian news network, Press TV, Saudi Arabia is taking emergency steps in preparing to counter any “radioactive hazards” that may result from an American attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
The Saudi newspaper Okaz disclosed that the Saudi government has approved nuclear fallout preparations, and the Iranian network reported that the approval came a day after Cheney met with the kingdom’s high-ranking officials, further stating that the U.S. “is now informing its Arab allies of a potential war.”
The American commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, has stepped up criticism of Iran, telling Congress last week that Iranian support for Shiite militias posed the most serious threat to Iraq’s stability. He told senators : “Iran has fueled the violence in a particularly damaging way.” Last week, the U.S. said Iran was providing insurgents with missiles that were killing Americans and hitting targets within the U.S. occupied Green Zone in Baghdad.
MSNBC Commentator Pat Buchanan said Petraeus’ remarks to Congress lay the groundwork for a U.S. attack on Iran.
President Bush said in a speech at the White House on April 10 that Iran, along with al-Qaida, are “two of the greatest threats to America.”
He said Iran “can live in peace with its neighbors,” or “continue to arm and train and fund illegal militant groups which are terrorizing the Iraqi people … If Iran makes the wrong choice, America will act to protect our interests and our troops and our Iraqi partners.”
He later told ABC News that if Iran continues to help militants in Iraq, “then we’ll deal with them.”
Members of Congress are said to have been briefed by the administration about the rising Iran threat.
Iran did little to cool tensions when it announced that it had begun installing 6,000 new centrifuges at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz.
Centrifuges can enrich uranium to a low level to produce nuclear fuel or a high level for use in weapons.
The announcement of the new centrifuges by President Ahmadinejad came on April 8, Iran’s National Day of Nuclear Technology, which marked the second anniversary of Iran’s first enrichment of uranium.
Iran already has about 3,000 centrifuges operating in Natanz, and the new announcement was widely seen as a show of defiance to international demands to halt a nuclear program that the U.S. and its allies insist is aimed at building nuclear weapons.
bump.
Bush, to his credit, will try to clean this up before he leaves office. Iran has had it coming.
What say you?
I agree
Nearing? It’s been nearing for how long now. Same as Afganistan. Either do it or forget it.
An unnamed source giving information to Newsmax...
Dream on!
And look at Jimmah Carter's visit to the terrorists as preparation for American liberals to condemn the action and to side with America's enemies.
this article is typical Newsmax. Made-up from start to finish, with no source, no information, and incorrect in intent and conclusion.
Not mentioned but evident is the fact that under the rug, Bush has assembled a new coalition dedicated to taking out Iran.
My own belief that the American role is backup and the main effort will be by other members of the coalition including Israel and Saudi Arabia. The other GCC members will have a hand but The IAF and Saudi AF will do the job what ever it turns out to be.
If Iran is crippled, Hamas and Hezbollah will wither. Ditto Syria.
Does anyone know whether Iran even has any nuclear power plants?
Iran has been responsible for the death of many American service personal—Bush knows it—Iran knows he knows it and it continues
What does that tell you
I just hope that he appoints Jimmy Carter as US Ambassador to Iran first.
Haven’t we heard this same song many times over the past year here on FR??
“But a senior diplomat had told the AP that IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] head Mohamed ElBaradei likely planned to use the meeting with Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran’s nuclear program, to renew a request for more information on allegations Tehran had tried to make atomic arms.”
I am starting to think we should just go ahead and bomb the IAEA...LOL!!(tongue in cheek, of course)
But they are they ones allowing all of these radical Muslim countries and enemies of the US to get ‘the bomb’ and build up arsenals WMDS by their constant foot dragging and undermining of America and her allies!!
El Baradei, in particular, has been a nightmare and if you ask me, he is complicit in North Korea getting the bomb, as well as Iran. He also sat around while the AQ KHAN network from Pakistan spread nuclear know how to god knows how many enemies of the United States!!
Where did you get your number of 80 Million in your tag line? that would be 219178 every day! Please reveal your source for this horrific number. Thank you.
bert, ya nailed it. Agree 100%.
Bump!
I’ll believe it when I see it on DEBKA!...............
A perfect time to launch an all out strike is November 5th.
But, don’t take our making of deliberate, unseen preparations as a signal we will not attack.
Many times the enemies of our country have made that mistake. We are slow to wrath, but when we strike, it will be with a vengeance.
IMO, Bush will not leave the Iran nuclear problem on the table before leaves.
Whack ‘em. Take out the terrorists/nuclear facilities/Holocaust deniers/Jew-Haters...
Whack ‘em. Take out the terrorists/nuclear facilities/Holocaust deniers/Jew-Haters...you know Mrs. Bill Clinton and/or Barack (middle name must not be named) Obama won’t stand up to them.
I used to believe these stories. But with every day closer to the election the chances dwindle.
I think it is too late for Bush to act.
The administration has done nothing politically to prepare then nation for an attack. They haven’t gone to congress or the UN and they haven’t gone to the public to make their case.
Unless Iran makes an overt first strike, the US won’t move on Iran.
A war between Israel, Syria and Iran? 50/50 by September.
Version 12.4.3
I really have doubts about that. Personally, I don't think he will.
OTOH, history will show that we went into Iraq to counter the real threat in region which is certainly Iran. But given the level of control of foreign policy we have allowed the MSM to assume it seems to me unlikely that Bush will follow through with a unilateral strike on Iran in an election year and without the support of the Congress. Just seems far fetched to me.
300 million people in the US, 1/2 of them women. 80 million abortions a year would be over half the women in the US having an abortion every year.
You do serious disservice to our side by claiming tripe like that.
Credible.
It’s been “coming” though, for nearly five years. I’m surprised we haven’t hit them hard, much sooner. Like everytime that idiot “Imanutjob” opens his mouth, like Reagan did with Kadaffi.
I say Newsmax. Not very credible at all.
The actual number is less than a million per year.
I say "NewsMax" and shake my head in disbelief. The tip-off for my skepticism is their "source," who is (for some reason) "a leading member of America’s Jewish community."
I suppose such distinctions are relevant in the mind of somebody like Pat Buchanan, whose nightmares are filled with legions of warmonging Jewish neocons.
But to the rational, the idea that a "leading member of the American Jewish community" is a good source for a story like this is like, well, going to Pat Robertson for the same sort of story.
Assuming that he really wants to there is not enough time. He can't do it before the election for fear of a backlash against McCain. After the election there isn't enough timefor more than a couple of airstrikes. Then he and leave the sh*t storm that follows to his successor. Kind of a going away present.
As credible as DEBKA.
Israel and Syria, almost certain. Iran ... that's where the American "stay out or face the consequences" ultimatum comes in.
Iran won't stay out ... and if that's the case, we'll stage some heavy targeted strikes on their nuclear facilities, IRG installations, and missiles.
First, a coalition including Israel would NOT include ANY other ME country, & certainly not Saudi Arabia. The idea that Israel & SA would cooperate in a bombing offensive is ludicrous. More likely that Obama would “nail” Hillary in the Senate cloak room.
Who would be the other coalition members? Not the Gulf states - they're too busy making money. Not Russia or Syria or Iraq! Turkey & Jordan - Very unreliable! These are Iran's immediate neighbors, & they are all aware that GWB will be retired in 9 months, to be replaced MAYBE by a pacifist. Right now, any potential ally is looking at a 1 in 3 chance of maintaining US support against Iran for the next 4-8 YEARS. I would not take that bet, nor will Saudi Arabia. Oh, they may allow overflights of US aircraft(but NOT IAF), but even that is an unnecessary risk, as the US has bases in Iraq & Afghanistan, plus the Naval Forces in the Gulf.
How about Canada, Britain, France, & Germany? Don't need them in the air, & they are unlikely to provide ground troops for combat.
Iran is not directly threatening any of its neighbors except Israel, as Saddam was. The Iranian nuclear threat is a few years down the road. Saudi Arabia would be making a permanent enemy from an unpleasant neighbor. Iranians have a long & bitter memory.
Second, prior to Gulf wars I & II, there was a long, loud diplomatic attack on Saddam & Iraq. Bush I & II both repeatedly warned Saddam they were coming, as well as prepping the American people for the war to come. The buildup was long & loud for psychological & political reasons. I don't see that now. Some may say this will be a sneak attack & requires secrecy, & ISRAEL may do that alone. But a coalition is hard to hide for long, given its diplomatic (blabbermouths) roots, & GWB doesn't have long.
Third, I don't believe GWB is willing to leave potentially bad unfinished business, such as a war with Iran, to his successor. Just as with Saddam, the Iranians will never wave the white flag of surrender, so this war could take years to root out the mullahs, if ever. Just like Iraq, once we invade, destroying the nuke sights will not be enough, & we will have to occupy & pacify. Bush wont risk leaving this job to HRC or BHO. Either could cut & run from “Bush's War”, leaving GWB with the blame.
Fourth, we don't have the troops to occupy Iran & have the ground security necessary to search for & destroy necessary targets. They're too busy in Iraq. No war can be won purely from the air & sea. Ground troops are always need to finish the job & verify the nukes are totally destroyed. To do the job right, we will need to remove a lot of “stuff”, requiring civilian scientists & techies to oversee the work.
No, he missed his chance last year, & the Navy is being oh so careful not to blast those speed boats.
Perhaps McCain will win in Nov., & continue pursuing Iran, because I don't want Israel to have to do this alone. Because if the US leads the attack with Israel, cowardly Syria likely will not interfere, & may rein in Hezbollah. Not likely if Israel goes it alone.
If Iran were attacked right now, oil would shoot up to $140-$150 almost overnight, and the Republicans would get destroyed in the election.
If it’s gonna be done, it’s got to be done SOON.
...and it’s really gonna mess with this election’s dynamics. Most likely be a big problem for McCain.
Agreed...we have been delaying doing the right thing for a couple of years now.
I’ll believ e it when I see it
C’mon...Newsmax??? Not likely anytime soon. I’d like to be wrong on this but I think Debka’s more credible than Newsmax.
Source = I wrote it down and then I read it - I believe everything I read!
Count me in the “no” category for expanding the war. Our soldiers are stretched thin enough fighting the war on two fronts. I don’t think it’s fair to ask them to do more than they are doing now.
The price of oil says it’s in the works.
It will start with a limited strike against the specific forces meddling in Iraq. Iran’s response will be over the top thereby providing us with the pretext to go after high value targets throughout Iran.
I’ve always said watch the money and other circumstantial indicators to determine if we are going after Iran.
Number 1 indicator is price of oil. This is by far the most significant indicator
Number 2 indicator is Israel’s hook up to our missle defense grid. This has happened only two times before and both times war ensued 91 and 2003.
Number 3 indicator Saudi preparations for collateral damage including fall out
Fill in the rest
No soldiers would be needed.
Anyone of our SSBN's with their crew of 154 sailors could eliminate Iran in 15 minutes, thereby finally ending the war started by Iran on Nov 4, 1979.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.