Untitled Document
Taking a Closer Look at the Stories Ignored by the Corporate Media
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact

NEWS
All News
9-11
Corporatism
Disaster in New Orleans
Economics
Environment
Globalization
Government / The Elite
Human Rights
International Affairs
Iraq War
London Bombing
Media
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism
Miscellaneous

COMMENTARY
All Commentaries
9-11
CIA
Corporatism
Economics
Government / The Elite
Imperialism
Iraq War
Media
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism

SEARCH/ARCHIVES
Advanced Search
View the Archives

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS -
-

On to Iran?

Posted in the database on Wednesday, April 13th, 2005 @ 15:18:27 MST (1349 views)
by Carlton Meyer    The Magazine of Future Warfare  

Untitled Document


Will the Bush administration order the US military to attack Iran or Syria?  Most Americans consider this unlikely.  The Iraq invasion and occupation has gone poorly and continues to strain the US military and economy.  President Bush's approval rating is at an all-time low.  American allies would not support the action, and may even denounce it.  Oil prices would double overnight to $100 a barrel.  Invading Iran would only make problems worse in Iraq, so few think the Bush administration will take action.  

However, common sense has eluded the Bush administration on many occasions, not only in Iraq but also the recent plan to "reform" Social Security.  Pulitzer prize winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has decades of experience in Washington DC and hundreds of high-level contacts.  He said last January that, "We've been taken over by a cult" of eight or nine neocons who are now in political positions to expand the war to Iran over strong objections from allies, career diplomats, the US Congress, and American Generals.  Keep in mind that Iran has three times the population of Iraq, a somewhat popular central government, and a military not decimated like Iraq's by a 1991 war followed by an arms embargo.

Will this cult expand the "war on terror" soon?  Several open sources hint that military action against Iran may occur this Summer.  Last January, the Pentagon awarded contracts to improve airbases in Afghanistan, including two near the Iranian border.  Former Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter has extensive contacts in the Middle East.  He was attacked by the corporate press in early 2001 for announcing that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, yet the Bush administration had decided to invade anyway.  Ritter announced last February that his sources say the USA will attack Iran in June 2005.  In addition, the US Army has sent missile defense units to Israel while the US Navy has a large number of ships underway.  This has generated excitement among influential American warmongers and Muslim haters.  Despite promises of a reduction in US troops after the Iraqi elections last January, all units remain.  The Army will begin its fourth annual unit rotation in June when 17 combat brigades arrive to replace those now on duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.  This will double the number of US ground combat forces in Persian Gulf area.

Perhaps this is all a coincidence, or perhaps Bush plans a temporary show of power to alarm Iran into granting concessions.  Or perhaps the USA will attack Iran or Syria.  Bush has said that Iran is part of an "axis of evil," and it seems unlikely that he will do nothing during his last four years in office while insisting the nation is at war.  Presidential approval ratings rise whenever the USA attacks another nation.  Combat video can fill television screens and distract the American people from a dying economy and the problems in Iraq.  Congressmen can excitedly plan another massive supplemental spending bill, and drop the issue of fiscal discipline and pending national bankruptcy.  

Nevertheless, President Bush needs an excuse to attack Iran. Outright lying was used to justify the conquest of Iraq.  There was criticism when the truth was exposed, yet no one in the Bush administration was pressured to resign, most were promoted to higher posts.  A Clinton appointee, CIA director George Tenet, became the fall guy.  In addition, half of Americans are so poorly informed by the corporate media that they still believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was involved in terrorism.  Nevertheless, America's allies will dismiss lies, and given America's dependence on foreign credit for economic survival, a better option is required.

US President Franklin Roosevelt  faced a similar problem in 1940.  He wanted to go to war against the Germans to aid the British.  However, 70% of Americans were against another foreign war, having been duped into World War I by President Wilson.  So Roosevelt developed a plan to provoke the Japanese to commit the first "overt act" to shock and enrage the gullible American people to support war.  There is much evidence of this conspiracy.  For example, many people know the Pentagon opened during World War II to run the huge US military.  However, the prime contract was awarded on 11 August 1941, four months before America was "thrust" into World War II after a "surprise" attack on Pearl Harbor.  A day after the Japanese attack, the USA declared war on Japan AND Germany, then made the defeat of Germany a greater priority.

  Few Americans know that the US Pacific Fleet was not based at Pearl Harbor in 1941, but San Diego.  Roosevelt ordered it deployed to Hawaii for "training" in 1940 and kept it there as bait for over a year, prompting the Pacific Fleet Admiral to resign in protest.  Then he organized an oil embargo against Japan, which resulted in the attack on Pearl Harbor, which Roosevelt and a few others knew about in advance since the Japanese code had been broken.  This is why the valuable American aircraft carriers slipped out of Pearl Harbor a few days before the attack, leaving behind some World War I era battleships as targets. This is documented in a recent book, Day of Deceit, written by a World War II US Navy officer.  

Neocons would love for Iran to commit a dastardly surprise attack.  It has been suggested that Iran's response to a major bombing attack would be immediate retaliation by firing missiles at US bases and ships in the Persian Gulf.   It would be easy for the USA to shut off telecommunications to Iran to prevent word of secret bombings to leak out until Iranian missiles responded.  The problem is how to keep this secret.  One option is to allow the Israelis to launch secret nighttime bombing strikes. Only a few US Generals would need to know and issue orders to ground US aircraft overnight for a "safety stand-down" and shut down radars for "repair."  Another option is to strike with a dozen stealthy B-2s bombers from their base in Missouri.  A more complex plan would penetrate Iran's military command and control system electronically, and send false messages that American bombers had hit targets so Iranian missiles should be launched.

American GIs in the region would be surprised by a sudden Iranian missile attack and will attest that it was unprovoked.  There would be many GI casualties and perhaps a Navy ship sunk, but Roosevelt sacrificed 2000 GIs at Pearl Harbor for his cause.  This will enrage the American people and ensure strong support for crushing the Muslim devils.  In addition, President Bush can demand support from NATO allies since the USA was attacked, and insist that friendly Arab nations send troops to help defeat the Persian evildoers.

This may seem bizarre, but no one should doubt that neocon warmongers are dreaming up justifications to attack Iran.  Not only was Pearl Harbor a conspiracy, but the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which justified sending US troops into combat in Vietnam, was a lie as well.  More recently, genocide claims used to justify the 1999 attack on Yugoslavia proved false, and Saddam's Hussein's "Weapons of Mass Destruction" were never found.  Therefore, one should be skeptical of news of a "surprise" Iranian attack.  No one will offer a rational explanation, except that Iranians are "evil," part of the "axis of evil" President Bush warned about.  Anyone who questions whether Iran attacked first will be labeled a traitor who doesn't "support the troops."  Coincidentally, American warplanes and forces will be ready to quickly respond, extra aircraft carriers will be offshore and extra Army units just arrived.  Americans will rally around the President and America's perpetual war for perpetual peace will continue.  

An attack or invasion of Iran would prove disastrous for the average American, although profitable for defense contractors and oil companies.  It may be the final straw that breaks the dollar, causing it to fall rapidly as the USA borrows hundreds of billions more from aboard to fund another war, money to be allocated by corrupt Congressmen led by Senator Ted Stevens.  Inflation will soar to double digits while the economy sinks into a recession.  Finally, an attack or invasion of Iran may stall, leaving US troops scattered around the Middle East vulnerable to counterattacks.  Hopefully, this nightmare will never happen.  However, there is a cult of neocons thinking up justifications to attack Iran.  Engineering a "surprise" Iranian attack is the best option.



Go to Original Article >>>

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Looking Glass News. Click the disclaimer link below for more information.
Email: editor@lookingglassnews.org.

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly




Untitled Document
Disclaimer
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact
Copyright 2005 Looking Glass News.