War on Iran has begun. And it is madness

[Jos]

It was the Little Interventionist Tony Blair who first began sanctions on Iran. And the build-up of hostilities has unnerving parallels with the case for war conjured by Blair and George Bush against Iraq. We have another dodgy dossier, in the shape of the report by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which claims Iran is developing nuclear weapons but says so largely on the basis of intelligence which ends in 2003. It relies on documents on a laptop, found in 2004 by the Israelis, whose reliability prompted deep scepticism among Western intelligence at the time. The foreign scientist said to have worked on a bomb with the Iranians turned out to be a nanotechnologist. And a former IAEA chief inspector has said the type of explosion chamber referred to in the report could not be used in a nuclear test.

On that, is based hawkish noises and sabre-rattling sanctions. Intelligence chiefs publicly say such things as, the West must use covert operations to sabotage Iran's nuclear programme. Politicians make thinly veiled threats of military attack using weasel words such as "all options are on the table". Pardon me if it feels like Iraq all over again.

Of course, some political leaders in Tehran do want the bomb. It is not hard to understand why. Everyone else in the region has one – Israel, Pakistan, India and Russia. US nuclear weapons have Tehran within range.

But Iran is a big, politically sophisticated country whose constitution of parliament, president, councils and assemblies of religious experts, creates a system of checks and balances in which change is possible. Reformers have held sway at times in this political pluralism. The Iranian establishment is fragmented into factions; a third of MPs did not vote for the measure to reduce the diplomatic status of Iran's relations with Britain last Sunday. But it is precisely the wrong reactionary factions which are strengthened by the bellicosity of the West.

And make no mistake, the war has begun. Virulent computer viruses disabled Iran's nuclear centrifuges last year. Two of the nation's leading nuclear physicists have been assassinated, and a third was wounded by assassins on motorbikes. The UK's decision to freeze $1.6bn of Iranian assets – which is what provoked the violence at the British embassy – was the fourth round of sanctions. Hawks like my military namesake talk openly of deploying unmanned drones against nuclear power stations and provoking an uprising against the government in Tehran. And now comes all the EU sound and fury about not bowing "to Iran's intimidation and bullying". The hollow laughter from Tehran reflects heightened nationalist resolution and increased hostility to the West.

Paul Vallely: War on Iran has begun. And it is madness - Commentators - Opinion - The Independent

 

[Ropey]

Yes, Iran is mad to think they can get away with what they attempt. Iraq tried and failed and Iran will as well. So then, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan will be dealing with their own defeats for many years and will not need to worry about attacking the US financial interests.

Phear the US ME Hegemony Jos. It's not Israeli, but phear it first...

 

[JStone]

I liked the Iran Iraq war that 1 million Arabs and muslimes were killed in. I await another lethal smackdown of the virgin chasers with great anticipation

allahu fucku

 

[Mr. H.]

 

[JStone]

These are a few of my favorite things

Iran Iraq War, 1 million dead
Lebanese Civil War, 250,000 dead
Algerian Civl War: 300,000 dead
Bangladesh Civil War: 500,000 dead
Black Sept., Jordan's King Hussein murders, expells 80,000 Palestinians
Syrian army kills 20,000 Syrians at Hama
Iraq gases hundreds of thousands of Kurds
1400 year conflict between Sunnis and Shiites
Fratricide between Hamas and Fatah
Syria/Hizballah assassinate Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri

 

[Mr. Jones]

I liked the Iran Iraq war that 1 million Arabs and muslimes were killed in. I await another lethal smackdown of the virgin chasers with great anticipation

allahu fucku

Oh look Marc39 is back..We await yet another smackdown and ban.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/search.php?searchid=4746327

http://www.usmessageboard.com/search.php?searchid=4746335

 

[JStone]

Lethal Iranian Weapons Entering Iraq
Mullen: Lethal Iranian weapons entering Iraq - Navy News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Navy Times

Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb iran!

 

[Jos]

Here we are in a financial crises and Marc39/Jstone goes on holiday

 

[waltky]

Granny says she agrees with dem lib'rals dat say Obama oughta reach out to dat Ammerdinerjab - yea, reach out an' slap him upside the head...

Is war with Iran inevitable?
Friday 9 December 2011 - Former UK foreign minister Malcolm Rifkind fears Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons. Not so, says campaigner Abbas Edalat, who thinks western hawks want war

As tensions between Iran and the west escalate, and US politicians call for regime change, Susanna Rustin talks to former foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind and Iranian-British academic Abbas Edalat, founder of the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran, about Iran's nuclear programme and the likelihood of war.

Malcolm Rifkind: I do not advocate a military attack on Iran, but the International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran is failing to comply with agency requirements and UN security council resolutions and it is very difficult for the international community to say it doesn't matter. If Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapons capability, that has massive implications.

Abbas Edalat: Sixty years ago the British government was demonising the democratically elected government of Mohammad Mosaddegh, and it is doing the same to the Islamic Republic. When sanctions failed then, it organised with the US the 1953 coup and brought back the Shah. And in Iraq the same unfounded allegations of weapons of mass destruction that we are seeing now were used to justify an illegal war. Western intelligence sources are feeding fabricated evidence to the IAEA, whose new head [Yukiya Amano] was disclosed by WikiLeaks to be a hardline supporter of the US. But the IAEA's latest report [last month] is disappointing for the western alliance because it says Iran has not diverted its declared nuclear material [to weapons].

MORE

See also:

Congress rebuffs easing of Iran sanctions
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans and Democrats determined to look tough on Iran and avoid any election-year challenges to their pro-Israel bona fides are rebuffing Obama administration pleas to ease proposed penalties on Iran's central bank.

The administration argues that the crippling penalties would undercut a carefully calibrated international effort targeting Tehran and would drive up oil prices, a potential economic boon that would help finance Iran's suspected pursuit of a nuclear weapon while hitting cash-strapped Americans at the gas pump. Just weeks after announcing a new round of restrictions, President Barack Obama on Thursday dismissed "some of the political noise out there" and said his "administration has systematically imposed the toughest sanctions on Iran ever." Obama said he was considering all options for dealing with Iran, but declined to be more specific.

Lawmakers are pressing ahead with penalties against foreign banks that do business with Iran's central bank, a plan that the Senate resoundingly endorsed last week on a 100-0 vote. "The administration does understand the centrality of this issue to forcing Iran. They would like to do it unimpeded by congressional mandates. That's true of every administration," Rep. Howard Berman of California, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in an interview. "On this, we're not going to just roll over and take their suggestions." The showdown between the administration and Congress encompasses policy realities and political maneuvering.

Tough economic penalties are the most viable option short of a military strike. Looking ahead to the 2012 elections, Republicans and Democrats are intent on presenting a record of hawkishness toward Iran and unwavering support for Israel, mindful of the importance for American Jewish voters and their financial contributions to the political parties. The sanctions measure sponsored by Sens. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., and Bob Menendez, D-N.J., was added to a broader defense bill that's now the subject of closed-door negotiations between the House and Senate. Lawmakers hope to produce a final version of the policy legislation early next week.

Few lawmakers, even Democrats, have argued the administration's case for weakening the penalties. "I think Democrats are scratching their heads that the administration is leading them into a policy provision which not a single Democratic senator can support," Kirk said in an interview. He said he spoke to the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., on Thursday and he indicated that the House negotiators would accept the sanctions provision.

MORE

 

[Mr. Jones]

Each start represents a US military base, but we should feel threatened by Iran?

 

[Mr. President]

They threatened the closest American targets so maybe you need not feel threatened however the Americans inhabiting those star shaped locations may have a different perspective.

 

[R.C. Christian]

I'm going to be absolutely thrilled when the price you war mongers pay for a loaf of bread or gas quadruples on the first day of your beloved war. I pray every day you get your war so I can laugh at you.

 

[Mr. President]

If we did it right we would take out the threat then take the oil to cover the expenses.

 

[Paulie]

If we did it right we would take out the threat then take the oil to cover the expenses.

No wonder there's foreign terrorists who want to kill American civilians.

 

[ABikerSailor]

If we did it right we would take out the threat then take the oil to cover the expenses.

Yeah......sure........that's what RumsFAILED, Cheney and Jr. told us about the Iraq war.

I seem to remember something about paying for the war with all the oil we'll get?

Look how well that turned out.

 

[Mr. President]

And we could have but we chose not too. Let's be honest here there is plenty of money in Iraq to have funded that war. The political machine that is congress chose not too. I am not defending their failrues simply stating that proper execution would have allowed the government to make money and pay for the war. By the way the terrorists over here want to kill us because we are allied with Israel and are not an Islamic country sooooooooooo lets keep it kosher.

 

[ABikerSailor]

And we could have but we chose not too. Let's be honest here there is plenty of money in Iraq to have funded that war. The political machine that is congress chose not too. I am not defending their failrues simply stating that proper execution would have allowed the government to make money and pay for the war. By the way the terrorists over here want to kill us because we are allied with Israel and are not an Islamic country sooooooooooo lets keep it kosher.

Then WHY did Jr. piss all of it away? Matter of fact, we were also told it would only be about 6 months to a year.

 

[Paulie]

By the way the terrorists over here want to kill us because we are allied with Israel and are not an Islamic country sooooooooooo lets keep it kosher.

Yeah I'm sure it's got nothing to do with the fact that there's people who think we should pilage and plunder the wealth and oil of Islamic nations.

 

[Mr. President]

Hell it only took a month to win the war. All this rebuilding crap is the reason we stayed. The civil Islamics who are the majority enjoy making money on western dependency on oil. But the extremists want us dead for the aforementioned reasons.

 

[Ropey]

By the way the terrorists over here want to kill us because we are allied with Israel and are not an Islamic country sooooooooooo lets keep it kosher.

Even if some of the heavy left want to invite them in.