Skip to comments.Is The U.S. About To Invade Iran?
Posted on 11/06/2011 7:51:04 AM PST by blam
Is The U.S. About To Invade Iran?
Global Macro Monitor
Nov. 6, 2011, 7:23 AM
Global Macro Monitor
Here is something brewing off radar.
Were wondering if this is a factor as to why crude is bid and gold is coming back? Debka wrote last week,
The inference was clear: The Israeli Air Force was strengthening its cooperation with Western allies in preparation for a NATO assault on Iran.
The IAF also got a chance to study the lessons Western alliance air force tacticians had drawn from the eight-month Libyan operation which ended on Oct. 31.
Next, the IDFs Home Command announced a large-scale anti-missile exercise in central Israel starting Thursday morning, Nov. 3.
Finally, Defense Minister Ehud Barak left for an unscheduled trip to London shortly after a secret visit to Israel by the British chief of staff General Sir David Richards earlier this week as guest of Israels top soldier Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz.
If the British general was in Israel only this week, why was Barak is such a hurry to visit London?
The answer came from the British media, which reported as soon as he arrived that the Ministry of Defense in London had accelerated and upgraded its contingency planning for participation in a US-led assault on Iran. They carried an account of plans for deploying large naval units including submarines to the Persian Gulf.
(Click to the site to see a video
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Yeah, right. The only thing he can lick is an ice cream cone.
Debka...wrong 99.9999% of the time.
No question whatsoever that the U.S. owes Iran one super-sized shipment of whipass. Hard to believe that Barak Hussein Obama would be one to deliver it.
Israel most likely...the USA under Bambi...NEVER!
No this Regime is too busy playing Brave Brave Sir Robin everywhere to do anything proactive against real enemies
If the US is headed for Iran, that would make it understandable that Obama wasn’t too fussed about our troops leaving Iraq. One of the big threats to stability in Iraq is Iran. If Iran is going to be distracted by defending itself, maybe Iraq won’t be bothered as much.
Another datapoint is Saudi. The recently publicized plot against the Saudi ambassador (I think that was his job) would certainly be a factor in the overall equation. It could be that Riyadh is giving the attack a green light.
If we are, it’s the polticians who will have to fight it. I don’t think that the military is in the mood for another “war” right now. Especially when you consider how bad the politicians screwed up the last two in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Just bring back the draft. Plenty of people camped in downtown everywhere just looking for something to do.
Only if it’ll keep jug ears in business.
He is amoral and if an "October Surprise" would help him win the election, he will do it.
You’re right. The state run “media” has been comparing the fleabaggers to the WWI vets, maybe it’s time we provide them with the opportunity to become REAL veterans.
actuallly if the US was going to invade Iran then it wouldn’t pull troops all the way out of Iraq first. They would leave them in Iraq and move them directly to Iran.
Misleading headline. Everything in the article points to airstrikes originating from land and sea. Splitting hairs, maybe, but that’s not an invasion.
Yup...those gay, female drill seargents will whip them into shape in no time.
What a joke everything has become.
Up is down - down is up!
Very, very bad time to try such a stunt. The military budgets are being decimated, morale will be sinking so low it will sound like a voice from the bottom of a well. “Hello, anybody
there, please HELP!” The brightest and best of the soldiers will walk - most have already seen enough of the Middle East. Probably see that in the other forces as well. Those that remain will be the dregs, with lower educational levels and maybe conduct issues. This from an old Navy junior and Army spouse and educator ...20+ years in the business of working with soldiers, but what do I know?
Good call ...
The same question was asked frequently during the GWB administration. There were so many people here ABSOLUTELY sure it would happen SOON. It never happened. I said it wouldn't then, & I'm saying NOW, Obama is NOT gonna attack ANYONE between now & the election.
What the Israelis do before the election is an entirely different matter.
The right way to frame it:
“Would Obama be willing to do our friends the Saudis a big favor if the result was also to wag the dog for his 2012 reelection?”
There, I think, the answer is more clear.
I don't know. If I had some ugly bull dyke trying to run my life it wouldn't take long before I was more than ready to kill something.
I don’t trust this source.
Another frakin’ article fomenting further BS hypothetical hype; something which has been an ongoing process for the past half decade concerning Israel and/or the US militarily striking Iran’s nuclear weapons program. =.=
I think you are right. Obama bows to Riyadh.
I’d be interested in what you think.
Gay female Drill Sargents with whips?
It looks like maybe a few unusual things have occurred and someone (Debka) has connected them to make this story.
I think there's only a remote possibility of this happening.
Now, would I like to see Israel 'stick-it' to Iran, yes.
An article citing Debka as source is as wrong as a football bat. Any Iran solution that does not have certain targets end up as smoking holes of melted silica is simply wrong.
They've got to know this - even if he gives them the OK in private - he is not to be trusted or believed.
Unfortunately, I think Israel is stuck waiting until they are attacked. At least as long as 0bama is in the White House.
“Obama is NOT gonna attack ANYONE between now & the election.”
I agree. He would totally alienate his liberal base, just when he needs them the most. Plus Obama probably soiled himself when the generals told him to sit down, shut up, and let them take out Bin Laden.
Obama might do it to try to get re-elected. The democrats think war is only for political gain.
He ISN'T! He NEVER DID!! :-)
That sounds more sensible. Good thing I’m not in charge of the military.
Our guys are pooped from Iraq and Afghanistan.
What are we gonna use for troops, Cub Scouts?
I think this invasion biz is very, very unlikely.
Time has past for this option...Unless israel acts alone.
>>”Hard to believe that Barak Hussein Obama would be one to deliver it.”<<
Obi is in a better position to deliver it. Anti-war, the Left & the media wouldn’t question Obi as much as they would a republican president.
Anyhow, I think the likelihood of a strike on Iran is high this time, unlike previous reports. For one thing, recently, the UK made a point of saying “the official UK policy on Iran is not regime change”. — http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2796638/posts?page=6#6 — A strike even on nuke facilities in Iran can result in ‘regime change’. And, unlike Iraq, this time it’ll have full support from the French. But, my guess is that they just don’t want to use neocon-type words. They’ve been trying to manage public perception.
The Saudis dread the Persians as do all the little oil emirates. No one wants to die for Palestine, or even be inconvenienced for it. They don’t mind writing a check to the terrorists, but they don’t want a real fight.
Some Persians have delusions of a re-emergence of the Persian Empire and this scares the bejeebers out of Arabs. The Arabs would be wise not to “encourage” the Ottoman, either.
I think you’re quite right about the Sheikdoms & S. Arabia.
Personally, if there was a ‘regime change’ in Iran, I’d be in favour of sending the whole lot of them mullahs & their supporters back to Arablands, particularly S. Arabia. So that they could be close to their beloved Mecca. They share the same ideology, love worshipping an Arab prophet, his book & his ways. Shi’ism is just a technicality - they can then sort things out w/ their moslem brothers & sisters. Currently, they are using a state-nation (Iran) to achieve their goals.