Be INFORMED

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Will Bush Attack Iran?

  We've all been hearing the rhetoric from the Bush Crime Family about how Iran is working on their very own nuclear weapons and that they would be a detriment to the the Middle East if they are allowed to build such weapons.

  Anyway, I found this informative article at Al-Ahram Weekly, based in Cairo and I thought that I'd pass along a few  bits and pieces of it for your reading pleasure. I'd post all of it but it is quite long. I do highly suggest that your read the entire story.

According to informed military sources, top officials in US Central Command in Florida have long since identified strike targets in Iran, which include the Natanz uranium enrichment plant and similar facilities in Esfahan, Arak and Bushehr. The sources add that the US will use long-range Phantom B-2 missiles and silo-busting bombs dropped from mammoth B-52s in an attempt to destroy reactors built some 25 metres underground. B-52s can fly at altitudes well out of reach of even the latest defence missile batteries.

ISRAEL'S STAKES IN WAR:

By 2007, Israeli plans were even more concrete. In January, the Sunday Times reported that Israel was conducting long-range training exercises and that if it did strike Iran it would use atomic bombs to penetrate Iranian underground bunkers. The newspaper added that the air force would use conventional laser-guided missiles to open breaches into which airplanes would then drop tactical atomic bombs, supposedly one-15th the power of the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

French military sources confirm the existence of secret Israeli plans to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities using nuclear weapons. They add that following strategic talks between Israeli and US officials in Washington on the Iranian nuclear threat, the Israeli and US air forces conducted joint training missions fine-tuned to the crisis in the Negev and in Gibraltar.

Reports predict that the US offensive against Iran will rely primarily on fighter planes from aircraft carriers and combat ships based in the Gulf. They also note that General John Abizaid was replaced by Admiral William Fallon as commander of US Central Command, which oversees military operations in the region, perhaps with this in mind. The replacement took place several weeks before General Abizaid was due to retire because of publicised differences with the Bush administration over the magnitude of the threat of a nuclear Iran and the military option. That Fallon would also step down in circumstances that suggest a difference of opinion on waging war on Iran underlined for many the seriousness of US administration rhetoric on Iran.

MOMENTUM TOWARDS WAR:Second, note the about-face Bush made towards the Nuri Al-Maliki government. Whereas the US president had formerly expressed disappointment in that government and hinted that he wanted to remove it from power, he suddenly gave it a public vote of confidence. Translated, this means that the Bush administration does not feel that it has enough time to arrange things exactly to its liking in Iraq before a military operation against Iran, so it decided to accept the current situation and avoid a constitutional crisis in Iraq and other headaches.

Seventh, there are strong indications of a heavy covert US presence in Iran. Iranian officials have accused the US of engineering a new wave of subversion in the country, using Pakistan as a staging point, with the purpose of destabilising the Iranian regime. In February 2008, Zahedan was the scene of a massive explosion that killed or injured dozens of Iranian Revolutionary Guard members. Iranian fingers pointed to Washington and charged that CIA operatives were increasingly active in the country, especially in the region of Baluchestan adjacent to the Pakistani and Afghan borders. These suspicions are not unfounded. We recall that Bush asked Congress for a $75 million allocation for the purpose of promoting democratic change in Iran and supporting Iranian opposition groups. The problem the US is encountering, in this regard, is that apart from the Kurds, Iran has no minorities that are interested in secession.

  Do you want to get a little more educated? Read the entire article HERE

Will Bush Attack Iran?

  We've all been hearing the rhetoric from the bush Crime Family about how Iran is working on their very own nuclear weapons and that they would be a detriment to the the middle east if they are allowed to build such weapons.

  Anyway, I found this informative article at Al-Ahram Weekly, based in Cairo and I thought that I'd pass along a few  bits and pieces of it for your reading pleasure. I'd post all of it but it is quite long. I do highly suggest that your read the entire story.

According to informed military sources, top officials in US Central Command in Florida have long since identified strike targets in Iran, which include the Natanz uranium enrichment plant and similar facilities in Esfahan, Arak and Bushehr. The sources add that the US will use long-range Phantom B-2 missiles and silo-busting bombs dropped from mammoth B-52s in an attempt to destroy reactors built some 25 metres underground. B-52s can fly at altitudes well out of reach of even the latest defence missile batteries.

ISRAEL'S STAKES IN WAR:

By 2007, Israeli plans were even more concrete. In January, the Sunday Times reported that Israel was conducting long-range training exercises and that if it did strike Iran it would use atomic bombs to penetrate Iranian underground bunkers. The newspaper added that the air force would use conventional laser-guided missiles to open breaches into which airplanes would then drop tactical atomic bombs, supposedly one-15th the power of the atom bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

French military sources confirm the existence of secret Israeli plans to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities using nuclear weapons. They add that following strategic talks between Israeli and US officials in Washington on the Iranian nuclear threat, the Israeli and US air forces conducted joint training missions fine-tuned to the crisis in the Negev and in Gibraltar.

Reports predict that the US offensive against Iran will rely primarily on fighter planes from aircraft carriers and combat ships based in the Gulf. They also note that General John Abizaid was replaced by Admiral William Fallon as commander of US Central Command, which oversees military operations in the region, perhaps with this in mind. The replacement took place several weeks before General Abizaid was due to retire because of publicised differences with the Bush administration over the magnitude of the threat of a nuclear Iran and the military option. That Fallon would also step down in circumstances that suggest a difference of opinion on waging war on Iran underlined for many the seriousness of US administration rhetoric on Iran.

MOMENTUM TOWARDS WAR:Second, note the about-face Bush made towards the Nuri Al-Maliki government. Whereas the US president had formerly expressed disappointment in that government and hinted that he wanted to remove it from power, he suddenly gave it a public vote of confidence. Translated, this means that the Bush administration does not feel that it has enough time to arrange things exactly to its liking in Iraq before a military operation against Iran, so it decided to accept the current situation and avoid a constitutional crisis in Iraq and other headaches.

Seventh, there are strong indications of a heavy covert US presence in Iran. Iranian officials have accused the US of engineering a new wave of subversion in the country, using Pakistan as a staging point, with the purpose of destabilising the Iranian regime. In February 2008, Zahedan was the scene of a massive explosion that killed or injured dozens of Iranian Revolutionary Guard members. Iranian fingers pointed to Washington and charged that CIA operatives were increasingly active in the country, especially in the region of Baluchestan adjacent to the Pakistani and Afghan borders. These suspicions are not unfounded. We recall that Bush asked Congress for a $75 million allocation for the purpose of promoting democratic change in Iran and supporting Iranian opposition groups. The problem the US is encountering, in this regard, is that apart from the Kurds, Iran has no minorities that are interested in secession.

  Do you want to get a little more educated? Read the entire article HERE