Iranian Alert - January 23, 2007 - World Press ponders: Will the US Fight Iran or Not?

Regime Change Iran ^ | 1.23.2007 | DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

Top News Story

World Press ponders: Will the US Fight Iran or Not?

• Brian Walden, BBC News pondered how best to respond to Iran's bullish nuclear ambitions. Hawks can be dismissed as warmongers; doves can be blamed for a policy of appeasement, as our history shows.
• The Guardian reported that one of the papers close to Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is threatening suicide attacks against American targets in response to the Iranian publics concern over a possible US attack on Iran - suggesting the highest levels are involved in ringing the alarm over the American deployment.
• People's Daily Online reported that news reports predicting a US military strike on Iran have run wild, with some Arabic media speculating that Washington has decided to launch an attack from the sea before April.
• Fars News Agency reported that the United States wants to incite a popular uprising in Iran, a senior Iranian official has been quoted as saying, adding that a confrontation between Washington and Tehran is "inevitable". US President George W. Bush "pursues a strategy hostile to Iran.
• The Jerusalem Post reported that US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns said, "We have to confront Iran," at the Herzliya Conference on Sunday.
• Ha'aretz reported that Richard Perle said President George Bush will order an attack on Iran if it becomes clear to him that Iran is set to acquire nuclear weapons capabilities while he is still in office.
• Reuters reported that a confidential Iranian government report has highlighted the damaging effects of wide-ranging sanctions against the country if Iran continues its nuclear program, French newspaper Le Monde reported.

 

Iran ready to talk with U.S. on nuclear issues

• Xinhua reported that Iran is ready to talk if the United States makes a formal request for negotiations. However, the country also insists it will not suspend its nuclear program.

 

Iran President Defiant in Face of Critical MPs

• The Guardian reported that Ahmadinejad, defied his domestic critics yesterday by vowing not to retreat from his nuclear and economic policies.
• International Herald Tribune reported that Iran's most senior dissident cleric, Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, criticized President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his nuclear diplomacy, saying it has harmed Iran.
• Yahoo News reported that Iran has barred 38 nuclear inspectors on a United Nations list from entering the country.

 

U.S. Deadlocked on Whether To Free Iranian Terror Suspects

• Eli Lake, The New York Sun reported that the American government is deadlocked on the issue of whether to allow five Iranians captured last Wednesday in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil to return home, according to three administration officials.

 

Here are a few other news items you may have missed.

• World Tribune.com reported that Iran's nuclear program seeks first-strike capability against Israel, a leading strategist said.
• The Telegraph reported that the European Union plans to increase sanctions against Iran's nuclear program at a meeting of foreign ministers today.
• International Herald Tribune reported that French President Jacques Chirac of France is not the first statesman to lose his touch at the end of a long reign, but his recently suspended plan to send Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy to Iran later this month qualifies as an extreme example of that syndrome.

[DoctorZIn]

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

To read today’s thread click here.

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[edpc]

So far, it looks like "or not"

We, as a society, really need to sack up.

[GulfWar1Vet]

Does the American people really support the idea of having a war against Iran?

Is it worth it?

[Hambone02]

People say that Islamic Jihadism is the new problem we have to deal with this century. I my opinion, that statement alone unveils the truth that we are not seeing things clearly. Maybe I am wrong, but Islamic Jihad was a problem long before 911, long before the 70's. Didn't Thomas Jefferson have to deal with Jihadists back in the 1780's? Sure, we may not have had to deal with them on our own shores in the beginning thanks to the oceans, but with our ever increasing advances in transportation and communications we have had to and will have to deal with it more and more. Until we see one of our major cities lying in ruins due to a nuclear blast because of our complacency and short lived 'resolve' I don't think think we will really grasp what we are up against. Iran is only part of the problem.

[ishabibble]

I'm stilling praying for the Iranian people to take care of the very necessary changes in their own country. The news is not looking very good right now, especially since Aminjinhaed and Hugo Chavez recently met and put their heads together. Oh, to be a fly on that wall...

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

It may have already started in a small way:

Karbala attackers posed as U.S. military officials

It is reasoned speculation....

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Democrats' silence on jihad is deadly

************************AN EXCERPT **********************************

From the editorial:

Heading into the 2008 campaign, our political universe is still divided. On one side are those who see the Islamists as a nuisance to be controlled.

On the other: those who regard them as an existential enemy to be destroyed. On the relative strength of those two camps, the next election may well depend.

[DustyMoment]

Holy crapola, Batman!! The "world press" and pols are beating us up for ever going into Iraq and NOW they want to know if we are going to take on Iran!!??

Are they SERIOUS . . . . . . . or seriously delusional??? If the Euroweenies want protection from Iran, THEY can go put up a battle for themselves so WE have someone to snipe at for a change!!

[R.W.Ratikal]

America has traditionally gone to war only after serious provocation or attack.

Today, with the Democrats in control of Congress it is highly doubtful if there is any will to self-defense. There is almost no chance that the American government will reply to Iran except to submit.

The government in Washington no longer speaks for most Americans.

[edpc]

Well.....when the Iranian forces are actively supplying and participating in attacks on our forces in Iraq, that's about as provactative as we need.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Surfing the Channels bit after 6pm local came across Scarborough country with Pat Buchanan and another guest talking about a secret plan the Military has prepared for President Bush with regard to Iran and how to stop their advancement of the Nuke program....( I think ...only caught the tail end. )

Pat says the President is deadly serious about stopping them.....and the Israelis are deadly serious and are muttering that if we don't stop Iran they will and their capabilities with non nukes are suspect so if they were to do they would have to use the bad stuff which ......well you get the drift....

Anyone know if their is a replay so if needed my impressions can be confirmed....guess that might be useful....

Not sure who the third participant was but seemed knowledgeable.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

OT a bit:

Military shows off new ray gun*******************EXCERPT *************************

Posted: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 4:10 PM

(AP) -- MOODY AIR FORCE BASE, Ga.  - The US military has unveiled a new weapon. They call it an "active denial system," but that's putting it gently. It's a ray gun that shoots a beam that makes people feel as if they're about to catch fire. But before you start thinking of a phaser set to kill, the technology is supposed to be harmless -- a non-lethal way to get enemies to drop their weapons.

Military officials say it could save the lives of innocent civilians and service members in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. The weapon, mounted atop a Humvee, was demonstrated to the media at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia. Three airmen and ten reporters volunteered to be zapped with the beams. Anyone hit by the beam immediately jumped out of its path because of the sudden blast of heat throughout the body.

[edpc]

Thanks.......Scarborough is rebroadcast at 4AM. Might be worth recording to review.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Maybe I am wrong, but Islamic Jihad was a problem long before 911, long before the 70's.

The weapons have changed and then there is that happening on Sept 11, 2001!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

I see this line item under :

MORE VIDEO FROM SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY

• War games with Iran

Not sure if that refers to what I viewed.....doesn't seem quite right.

[Nachoman]

Fight Iran? I hope not. Bomb their cities into a smoldering pile of rubble? Works for me.

[traumer]

Will the world participate ??

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Just viewed the video I reference in post #16....that isn't what I saw tonight....I found it interesting however.....

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks for the ping. Seems like a lot of rehashing of things that have streamed forth over the past few years.
The only major change has been since the Mullah have installed Ahmadinajah as president and given him a thumbs up to reorganize various parts of the government to purge more conservative Mullahs and dump secularist, and consolidate more control over the Intelligence and Secret Police.
And we understand how some of these mystical Shia feel about ushering in a world of total chaos that supposedly would bring the twelve imam out of the pussy well.
I still think the only way to bring an end to this sectarian mullacracy is for enough of Iranians to be willing to spill their blood to kick them all out, and cry out for a secular government free of Sharia laws.
Threatening Europe, China, and Russia by thinking we would actually bomb the shit out of them and stop their flow of oil, may simply not be enough incentive for all nations to band together and impose adequate sanctions. Even if we cut them off they still will work on their nuclear program, "let the people starve but feed the stock UF6 into the centrifuges".
And if we applied sufficient sanctions to cut Iran off monetarily, to a point where they simply cannot continue their nuclear ambitions, then we most likely would also stop their ability to ship crude oil and gas.
There are so many catch twenty twos surrounding the Iranian issue.
Everyone other then Israel for the obvious reasons simply would rather turn their head from the real issues. Like North Korea. They figure then can continue on the nuclear path regardless of how badly their populations will suffer economically. To nations lead by very crazy people. People who in their madness and desire up ultimate power will go to any lengths at the expense of their subjects.
How does one deal with them. NK could be totally isolated and literally starved out of existence to no effect to the rest of the world. But Iran pumps a lot of oil and gas. If it where not for that fact, the solutions could be so easy to obtain, and most likely palatable by many nations.
At any rate. Do have a great upcoming day. I gotta hit the sack to get up for another day at the funny farm.