portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts global

government | imperialism & war

Bush administration finalizes military attack on Iran.

Intelligence and military sources in the United States and abroad are reporting on various factors that indicate a U.S. military hit on Iranian nuclear and military installations, that may involve tactical nuclear weapons, is in the final stages of preparation.
Intelligence indications and warnings abound as Bush administration finalizes military attack on Iran.

Intelligence and military sources in the United States and abroad are reporting on various factors that indicate a U.S. military hit on Iranian nuclear and military installations, that may involve tactical nuclear weapons, is in the final stages of preparation. Likely targets for saturation bombing are the Bushehr nuclear power plant (where Russian and other foreign national technicians are present), a uranium mining site in Saghand near the city of Yazd, the uranium enrichment facility in Natanz, a heavy water plant and radioisotope facility in Arak, the Ardekan Nuclear Fuel Unit, the Uranium Conversion Facility and Nuclear Technology Center in Isfahan, the Tehran Nuclear Research Center, the Tehran Molybdenum, Iodine and Xenon Radioisotope Production Facility, the Tehran Jabr Ibn Hayan Multipurpose Laboratories, the Kalaye Electric Company in the Tehran suburbs, a reportedly dismantled uranium enrichment plant in Lashkar Abad, and the Radioactive Waste Storage Units in Karaj and Anarak.

bushehr.jpg (41723 bytes)

Primary target: Bushehr nuclear reactor and hundreds of Russian technicians

Other first targets would be Shahab-I, II, and III missile launch sites, air bases (including the large Mehrabad air base/international airport near Tehran), naval installations on the Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea, command, control, communications and intelligence facilities. Secondary targets would include civilian airports, radio and TV installations, telecommunications centers, government buildings, conventional power plants, highways and bridges, and rail lines. Oil installations and commercial port facilities would likely be relatively untouched by U.S. forces in order to preserve them for U.S. oil and business interests.

There has been a rapid increase in training and readiness at a number of U.S. military installations involved with the planned primarily aerial attack. These include a Pentagon order to Fort Rucker, Alabama, to be prepared to handle an estimated 50,000 to 60,000 trainees, including civilian contractors, who will be deployed for Iranian combat operations. Rucker is home to the US Army's aviation training command, including the helicopter training school.

In addition, there has been an increase in readiness at nearby Hurlburt Field in Florida, the home of the U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command. The U.S. attack on Iran will primarily involve aviation (Navy, Air Force, Navy-Marine Corps) and special operations assets.

There has also been a noticeable increase in activity at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center at Twentynine Palms, California, a primary live fire training activity located in a desert and mountainous environment similar to target areas in Iran.

From European intelligence agencies comes word that the United States has told its NATO allies to be prepared for a military strike on Iranian nuclear development and military installations.

On November 17, 2005, Russian President Vladimir Putin spent seven hours in secret discussions with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan during the the opening ceremonies in Samsun, Turkey for the Russian-Turkish underwater Blue Stream natural gas pipeline, festivities also attended by Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.

According to sources knowledgeable about the meeting, Erdogan promised Putin, who has become a close friend, that Turkey would not support the use of its bases by the United States in a military attack on Iran. That brought a series of high level visits to Turkey by Bush administration officials, including CIA chief Porter Goss, FBI Director Robert Mueller, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Although Erdogan listened to Goss's and Rice's pleas for Turkish logistical, political, and intelligence help for an attack on Iran and Turkish Army Chief Yasar Buyukanit heard much the same from Pentagon officials during his recent trip to Washington, the word is that Putin now has enough clout in Ankara to scuttle any use of Turkey by the U.S. for an attack on Iran. [Mueller delivered Ankara intelligence "proof" of Iranian backing for Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK) guerrillas in Turkey. Intelligence agencies and business intelligence units around the world are now discounting any intelligence coming from the Bush administration as neocon propaganda invented by think tanks and discredited intelligence agencies in Washington, Tel Aviv-Herzliya, and Jerusalem].

irannuke.jpg (121275 bytes)

A U.S. Attack on Iran: The Perfect Storm for wider nuclear conflict

U.S. political and military officials have also approached Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, Oman, and Azerbaijan seeking their support for a U.S. attack on Iran. Ina replay of the phony pre-war intelligence on Iraq, Washington is trying to convince various countries that a link exists between Iran and "Al Qaeda."

Polish intelligence sources report that Poland's Defense Minister Radek Sikorski assured Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld of Poland's support for any U.S. strike against Iran. Sikorski is a former American Enterprise Institute colleague of such neo-cons as Richard Perle, Michael Ledeen, and Lynne Cheney, the so-called "Second Lady" of the United States. Sikorski and Polish Foreign Minister Stefan Meller assured Rumsfeld and Rice, respectively, that Poland would stand by the United States during the split in NATO that will occur as a result of the American strike. Polish intelligence sources, who are unhappy with the arrangement of the new right-wing government in Warsaw with the Bush administration, leaked the information about the recent U.S. demarche to NATO in Brussels about preparation for the attack.

Similar intelligence "leaks" about the U.S. attack plans were also leaked to the German magazine Der Spiegel.

European intelligence sources also report that the recent decision by Putin and Russia's state-owned Gazprom natural gas company to cut supplied of natural gas to Ukraine was a clear warning by Putin to nations like Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Moldova, France, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Bosnia, Serbia, and Germany that it would do the same if they support the U.S. attack on Iran. Gazprom natural gas is supplied, via pipelines in Ukraine, from Russia and Turkmenistan to countries in Eastern and Western Europe. The Bush administration charged Russia with using gas supplies as a "political tool."

Putin has additional leverage on Western Europe since former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder accepted an appointment to the board of a joint Russian-German North European Gas Pipeline Consortium that is controlled by Gazprom. The pipeline will bring Russian gas to Scandinavia, Germany, Netherlands, and Britain, giving Putin additional leverage over Washington in Europe.

Southeast Asian intelligence sources report that Burma's (Myanmar's) recent abrupt decision to move its capital from Rangoon (Yangon) to remote Pyinmana, 200 miles to the north, is a result of Chinese intelligence warnings to its Burmese allies about the effects of radiation resulting from a U.S. conventional or tactical nuclear attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. There is concern that a series of attacks on Iranian nuclear installations will create a Chernobyl-like radioactive cloud that would be caught up in monsoon weather in the Indian Ocean.

yangon.jpg (10072 bytes)

Rangoon (Yangon) capital moved 200 miles north over fears of monsoon season Iran nuclear fallout?

Low-lying Rangoon lies in the path of monsoon rains that would continue to carry radioactive fallout from Iran over South and Southeast Asia between May and October. Coastal Indian Ocean cities like Rangoon, Dhaka, Calcutta, Mumbai, Chennai, and Colombo would be affected by the radioactive fallout more than higher elevation cities since humidity intensifies the effects of the fallout. Thousands of government workers were given only two days' notice to pack up and leave Rangoon for the higher (and dryer) mountainous Pyinmana.

In neighboring West Bengal, the leftist government and its national leftist allies around the country are planning massive demonstrations during Bush's upcoming trip to India. They are protesting the war in Iraq as well as the threats against Iran.

Reports from Yemen indicate that western oil companies are concerned about U.S. intentions in Iran since the southern Arabian country catches the edge of the monsoon rains that could contain radioactive fallout from an attack, endangering their workers in the country.

The Bush administration aborted last minute plans to attack Iranian nuclear and political installations prior to the 2004 presidential election. On October 9, Rumsfeld met with defense minister colleagues on the now decommissioned USS John F. Kennedy in the Persian Gulf to seek support for the attack. That meeting has been confirmed by the Danish Defense Minister who was in attendance, however, the topic of the meeting was not discussed. According to U.S. naval personnel on board the Kennedy, a special "war room" was set up to coordinate the attack. Britain, Australia, Italy, Netherlands, and Japan did not attend the meeting because of their opposition to the attack plans.

Intelligence and military officials around the world are also bracing for the results of a U.S. attack on Iran. This includes the distinct possibility of a major Shia retaliatory attack in Iraq, the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, and Afghanistan against U.S. military, diplomatic, and economic targets in the region. Radioactive fallout from a conventional or tactical nuclear attack on Iran will result in major problems with Pakistan, India, China, Russia, Japan, and other downwind countries in Asia and the Pacific Rim, possibly including the fall of the Pervez Musharraf government in Pakistan and replacement by a radical Islamist regime having possession of nuclear weapons. That would provoke a military response from nuclear power India.

In a counter-attack, Iran would immediately launch its Shahab I and II missiles at the U.S. Green Zone in Baghdad, the Al Udeid airbase in Qatar, the US Navy base in Bahrain, Camp Doha base in Kuwait, Al Seeb airbase in Oman, Baghdad International Airport, the U.S. base in Kandahar, Afghanistan. Iran would also launch its long-range Shahab III missiles on the Israeli cities of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Beersheba, Eilat, and the Israeli nuclear complex at Dimona. Iranian missiles would also be launched at US naval ships in the Persian Gulf and oil installations in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

The virtual end of NATO as a viable defense organization may also result from an attack that will drive a final wedge between Washington and Europe. And China may elect to respond financially and militarily against the United States since Iran is China's second largest source of imported Middle East oil after Saudi Arabia and plans to use an Iranian terminal for the export of natural gas from Turkmenistan. [China now imports 60 percent of its oil needs, and Iran represents 17 percent of those imports].

Russia recently participated in, through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a three-way military exercise (code named "Indira 2005") between Russia, China, and India to prepare for any new U.S. power projections in Asia, including an attack on Iran, a prospective SCO member. Last August, Russia and China held their first-ever joint land-sea-air military exercises.

Iran also held a large military exercise in early December in Bandar Abbas on the Gulf. An Iranian C-130 carrying Iranian journalists from Mehrabad airport to Bandar to cover the exercise crashed into a Tehran apartment building on December 6, killing at least 116 people, including 68 journalists.

Within the U.S. military and across the globe, there is heightened tension about the intentions of the neocon Bush administration and its allies in Israel.
 http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
With nukes hitting nukes, will there be much radiation?... 03.Jan.2006 20:26

Pravda or Consequences

This is the Iraqi exit strategy.

janes 03.Jan.2006 20:39

rAT (yet again)

according to Janes and other sources, the minute Iran recognizes an American or Israeli attack, it will laucnch numerous Sunburn Class missles, compliments of Putin. One of these can easily DESTROY a battleship. The huge losses to be incurred by the U.S. Navy seems to me to be a major stumbling block in this plan. Will Bush and Cheney allow the Persian Gulf to become a mass grave of wrecked hulks and dead seamen? Could be, but I wouldn't bet on it. The slow but steady death rate of U.S. ground troops by attrition is acceptable to these neocon monsters. The public accepts the trickle of steady but barely perceptable troop deaths as almost normal. But a massive 911-like wipeout of entire Navy crews could send the planet into paroxysms of armageddon-like terror, especially here in the USA. I think Bush and his crew are in too much deep shit here at home already. Attacking Iran sounds not only like a completely irrational decision battlewise, but almost a suicidal impulse politically. I mean, isn't all this WMD baloney the reason we're now stuck in Iraq? We're going to fall for it again with the Iranians? Iran is an extremely proud theocracy. They will die for it en masse. Remember Iran's president from Jimmy Carter days when he was holding American hostages in hellish conditions in Teheran? What a cold blooded prick! He's a real match for Bush. Then again he might be working for the CIA too. But I doubt it. (my new copyrighted 2006 tag line)

Not enough troops 03.Jan.2006 21:40

Man on the street

We do not have enough troops to maintain our presence in Afganistan and Iraq while invading Iran. The U.S. will not tolerate a draft at the same time so many congressmen are under watch for campaign scandals and Bush is under the gun for spygate. Bush does not have the political clout. On the eve of the biggest republican scandal ever, opinion polls are down across the board. If Bush did something this stupid the CIA miight dissappear him. I bet you wouldn't hear a peep out of big Daddy in the Carlyl Group.

that's not the same guy 03.Jan.2006 21:57

look close

the eyes are completely different

Phony USWars since the 19th C. 03.Jan.2006 23:04

Bedouin

Most (all?) US military actions ("wars", etc.) are contrived as responses to some PR'd provocation, moral obligation, excuse acceptable to the US and . In fact, the business of the business of the business of USWar business, is to keep things stirred up, sort of on simmer, using the permanent, temporary US presence all over the planet. Then, as domestic politics and power balances shift or are threatened, corporate/military affairs transpire, as global economics bob and weave and impact the euphemism "US interests", ducks are put in a row to justify military action.

---Gulf of Tonkin "torpedo boats" attacking (gasp!) a US War Ship--Go to War! Dominoes are threatening.

---US reflags Kuwaiti tankers, hoping Sadam would attack, justifying retaliation (didn't work), so...
bring in an expendable, stooge US ambassador to goad Sadam to occupy Kuwait, which he does--bingo! Go to War! US ambassador's work is done, career over and disappears.

---Then, having gone to war, and "won", continue persistant attrition with "no fly zone" bombing for years and years, keeping the pot on simmer, waiting for opportunity to justify occupying the center of the Middle East oil fields. (Recall that the initial deployment was to Afghanistan, probably in response to the fluke 911 attack, quickly morphed to a much bigger effort in Iraq. Further, note that a US invasion and occupation of Iraq, following on driving Sadam's occupation out of Kuwait, was very apparently judged to likely result in regional and global reaction, strains in NATO, with the Russians and the Islamic world unpredictibly and uncontrollably destabilizing--the time wasn't ripe during Desert Storm. But 911 provided the cover, later.)

Look back at the Reagan and Bush the Taller "Wars"... military exercises and weapons and tacticts testing for the military establishment. The South Viet Nam floating crap game taken to Central America to "confront totalitarian communism". Look at Bush the Taller's fit of pique with Noriega, a CIA stooge, later renegade, threatening to out the agency's nefarious drug enterprises under Bush the Taller's chieftanship at the agency--bomb neighborhoods, lay waste to civilians, to get Bush's embarrassment under wraps, now rotting in a cell in Miami. No need to do him in, just keep him out of communication with the rest of the world for the rest of his days. That's what Operation Just Cause was about.

The US corporate/military/neocon regime appears to want to keep Iran on simmer, possibly looking for the luckout opportunity, while provoking Iran to do something that can justify another US "back to the wall" retaliation, re-goosing the PR machine, getting the herd and congress to again stand on the corner and sing god bless america and get the kids to follow the flag--if the cards fall right, maybe even get the US to "war footing", making greater material and social sacrifices than can be ginned up now--ultimately letting the corporate/military imperium get a bigger boot in the oil fields.
Assessment of personal priorities motivating Arab Muslims
Assessment of personal priorities motivating Arab Muslims

look closer 04.Jan.2006 11:23

rAT

the eyes are different? You must be kidding.They look the same to me, as well as the nose and lower lip and distance from nose to hairline. And distance between eyes. Body type and weight too. Sorry Charlie, but it's the same asshole. Pretty lame comment I must say. Remember, all the time they had those hostages, we were secretly making deals with them. Might still be making deals with them.

rAT The Anatomist 04.Jan.2006 16:09

Nasreen

Yeah, rAT, they both have olive skin, full beards, dark hair, and slim builds. So, they must be the same guy? There must be at least several million Iranian men who fit this general description.

some thoughts on this 04.Jan.2006 20:00

black crow

here are some writings i've noticed recently actualy ifelt they were compeling. Iran talk

The first sentence from an article (or here) by James Petras on the supposed upcoming Israeli attack on Iran:

"Never has an imminent war been so loudly and publicly advertised as Israel's forthcoming military attack against Iran."

Exactly! Do you think Israel would be threatening war against Iran every day if it actually had any intention of attacking? Israel of all places knows the advantages of surprise (and the disadvantages of being surprised). All this warning has just given Iran the opportunity to buy and install the most sophisticated anti-aircraft defense systems available. You might argue that the Israeli threats are intended to influence Iranian behavior except for the fact that the constant threats have only served to influence the Iranian leadership to accelerate the development of Iran's nuclear program.


Reasons why Israel won't attack:


1. Iran isn't built on Greater Israel.

2. Shi'ite Iran will serve a major Israeli ally against its main problem, the Sunni world.

3. Iran, even with a nuclear program, poses absolutely no real threat to Israel.

4. It's Syria and not Iran that is the target in the 'Clean Break' document, a document that has been followed by Israel almost down to the word (well, except for the big part about reducing dependency on American taxpayer largesse).

5. Israel's safety depends on the mythology that it cannot be defeated, an idea achieved through much Israeli sacrifice. It has been pointed out that Israel's problem is that it has to win every time, and its enemies only have to win once. If Israel sends bombers against Iran, bombers which fail in their mission and are shot down, the Israeli mythology is shot down at the same time, and Israel's despondent enemies have a new reason for hope. Attacking Iran isn't worth the risk.


If you're looking for a real reason for all the Israeli talk of attack, here's (or here) 600 million of them. Talking up the threat to Israel is the main way Israel extorts money from the U. S. Congress.


This is a testable hypothesis. Let's see if there is an American or Israeli attack on Iran before the end of Bush's second term. I say no. On the other hand, it appears that Syria is in mortal danger of at least an air attack, and probably an attack from American ground troops. All the John Bolton machinations involving Mehlis and the U. N. aren't being done for fun.
also from the same blog i saw this . Ten reasons for Iran talk
Top 9 reasons why Israel might want to lie about having plans to attack Iran:


1. The lie forces Iranian leadership to the right, and reinforces the position of the most radical Iranian leaders who are most likely to be anti-Sunni.

2. The lie forces Iran to buy defensive weapons, and Israelis, big players in that market, will no doubt get a cut (remember that a large reason for Iran-Contra was to give Israelis the deal to sell weapons to Iran).

3. The lie is just another in the long series of distractions planned by Israel to hide the real problem in the Middle East, Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.

4. The lie reminds everyone of the military ability of Israel to attack any country in the Middle East.

5. The lie emphasizes that Israel, apparently alone amongst all the countries of the world, has the right to attack any other country for no reason other than a slight feeling of unease.

6. The lie reinforces the idea that Israel, alone amongst countries in the Middle East, is allowed to possess nuclear weapons.

7. The lie plays extremely well to right-wing voters in Israel, which has an election campaign going on now.

8. The lie gives the American politicians another reason to fall in behind Israel, and another reason to send billions of dollars to Israel to buy 'defensive' weapons from American military contractors.

9. Most importantly, the lie focuses attention on another 'existential threat' to Israel, the kind of threat necessary in all fascist regimes - the Nazis had the Slavs, the Gypsies, and, oh yes, the Jews; the Bush Administration has the 'war on terror' - to support the otherwise intolerable burdens placed on its citizens.


I agree that it is prudent to pursue this issue as quickly as possible, and can't fault anyone for trying to publicize Israeli plans before it is too late to stop another Holocaust like Iraq. On the other hand, the noisiness of the Israeli plans for Iran leads me inevitably to the tenth reason for Israel to lie: the lie about Iran hides its very real plans for Syria, plans which are underway right now. I continue to find extreme bad faith in all those critics of the Iraq attack, including Europeans and some American Democrats, who are allowing exactly the same conspiratorial plan used against Iraq - involving lies and manipulation of the United Nations - to be employed against Syria, with nary a word of complaint.

Halliburton, Cheney, Iran, Rafsanjani, the caymans and the new president. 04.Jan.2006 21:22

land of fire

to those who still think the two are enemies, here's an interesting article.

 http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3040

the new president of iran is not a hostage taker. this has already been proven. you must still be listening to limbaugh for your news.

he was the mayor of tehran and before that, in charge of the middle east's largest political prison: Evin. and before that he was part of the conservative student group trying to overthrow the shah. he's a religious nut case. remember when bush said he invaded iraq because god told him so, well this guy thinks there was a light around him as he gave his speach to the UN.

he woulld never take hostages 05.Jan.2006 11:19

rAT

right. He would never take hostages. After all, he only ran the BIGGEST POLITICAL PRISON IN THE MIDDLE EAST. Oh yeah, and he was an 'anti-Shah' student protester. No shit Sherlock. And there's the picture (above) of him back then, terrorizing some poor outreach worker to death.

rAT Always Has To Be Right - Even When He's Wrong 05.Jan.2006 14:46

Nasreen

Ahmadinejad denied that he was a hostage taker. If he had been a hostage taker, wouldn't he be proud of it? Why would he deny his role in such a glorious action, rAT? Do you think he's afraid of reprisals from the Great Satan?

Nasreen- 05.Jan.2006 15:45

rAT

Why would he deny his role? Because he was helping lead a false-flag CIA sponsored 'hostage-taking' overseen by GHW Bush in order to snag votes for Reagan and make Carter look impotent just before the elections for President of the USA. Remember the birthday cake for Khomeini? "From your buddy, Ronnie". This was the real 'October Surprise'. Iran let 'em all go free as soon as Raygun won. Your boy was in the middle of all of it. It walks and quacks like a duck pal....... I'd give your beliefs some consideration if you had some real backup info to support it. TONS of commentators have mentioned the UNCANNY resemblance and history, but the mainstream media dropped it like a live grenade after the implications became apparent. I love a good debate, but plausable denial is not exactly a compelling argument for innocence. Mention 'Iran-Contra' to the average citizen and he thinks of out of control guerillas who dealt coke to stay afloat. But it was really about a secret, unelected, alternative government operating from the White House basement under Oliver north. They dealt tons of drugs and collaborated with known terrorists in order to further the political ambitions of Reagan and Bush inc. The overnight nature of the 80's crack epidemic didn't happen by accident. PROVE me wrong about Rasfanjani.