*Recommended
Village Voice: A Gut Feeling: Israel is About to Attack Iran
This writer pulled together a chronology of disparate items that I call “reading the tea leaves” and paints a compelling picture… And he missed some of the stuff that we’ve reported here, including the anti-Iran resolution that passed 97-0… all the heightened hype/focus on al-Qaeda…

Posted by: Bea | Jul 14 2007 15:44 utc | 103

@Rick, Great statement: If there is a common theme to this thread, it is the utter disregard for the Iraqi people. You’re right that we all approach it from a different angle, and I in particular, as a citizen of the next target, appreciate each and every one of your statements even if I’m not overwhelmed by the ‘Occultism’ theory, though I accept that I may be wrong.
@Bea, you blame the chaos on the U.S. while I stated blame it on Israel. Actually, I would go even further and apportion the blame to the ‘Zionists’ in the United States without whose help Israel couldn’t survive. They control the media and much of the nation’s financial resources. In effect in the United States you have 5 million Jews disproportionately influencing the foreign policy of a nation of 300 million. When is THIS going to stop? When will the majority of U.S. citizens regain control of their own country?
Iranians have to risk our lives to bring about change: You Americans can do it at the ballot box. I mean, I shall never forget the Senator from Israel, Joe Lieberman, before the 2000 election, proudly announcing that he would refuse to work on the Sabbath even if America was hit by a nuclear bomb!!! Why did do many of you vote for such a ticket? Because you thought Bush would protect your interests? Unfortunately they’re all the same, one group vicious, the other group dumb.
To summarize my theme, the Zionists are a lot cleverer than your good ‘ol boy WASPS, and that’s why the dumb Texas folk were taken for a nightmarish ride, the end of which we haven’t seen.

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 14 2007 16:09 utc | 105

Actually I think it is the symbiosis between the two that has brought us where we are. I agree that the Texas folk are dumb and were taken for a ride, as was the whole administration, but they are also willing, happy, and able to use force on a scale beyond that which Israel would ever have dared to dream. In effect both the administration and the neo-cons have each served as the other’s “enabler,” helping the other to bring to fruition the very most extreme version of its desired ends.
As for changing things at the ballot box, it’s not that easy. We’ve seen how elections have been rigged in this country in a variety of ways, and how even when the results are too large to rig the outcome, the elected officials blithely ignore the mandate given to them by the people and continue to make enable the policies that are so self-destructive for the US. Don’t assume that our electoral system is still properly functional, or that those “elected” are not simply placed there by virtue of the highest dollar investment by the most interested party. Lieberman being a perfect example, since he won re-election thanks to NY mayor Bloomberg’s pouring money into Connecticut to swing the outcome.
Finally, I agree that the chaos is not clear-cut or simple. I think the US wanted just enough chaos to instill a puppet regime and get to the desired end, which is the signing of the oil law. However, those in control did not have a clue about what forces they were unleashing or what type of environment they were trying to work in. And they were definitely, most definitely, taken by a ride by many Middle Eastern parties who are infinitely smarter, wiser, more sophisticated, and more subtle than they could ever hope to be. So the chaos that was supposed to be “manageable” quickly spun completely and totally and wildly out of control…. and it will stay that way for a while.
There’s nothing simple or clear-cut about what has happened in Iraq. No single actor explanation can suffice.

Posted by: Bea | Jul 14 2007 16:21 utc | 107

anna missed #94
Chaos is useless in milking another state and is only useful with respect to preventing a populous/nationalist government ..from materializing – or breaking up the formation of one that is beginning to materailize ….
don’t underestimate the psychological ‘benefits’ of chaos and how it is used to manipulate and demoralize people. it can be used as a ‘softening’ to get populations to accept submission.
michael ledeen
“Total war not only destroys the enemy’s military forces, but also brings the enemy society to an extremely personal point of decision, so that they are willing to accept a reversal of the cultural trends,” Adam G. Mersereau, a former Marine and an Atlanta attorney, writes. “The sparing of civilian lives cannot be the total war’s first priority. . . . The purpose of total war is to permanently force your will onto another people.”

Posted by: annie | Jul 14 2007 16:30 utc | 109

Bea, your explanation of how difficult it is to change things in the States via the ballot box makes me perversely less uncomfortable with the inability of us Iranians to get rid of these crazy, corrupt and God-despising Mullahs.

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 14 2007 16:38 utc | 111

Parviz
If you want to change anything in Iran you should buy, start, or take over an advertising agency. their business, and the ones that make money are very good at it, is to create public opinion. Once you can do that, the world is your oyster.
all campaigning, posturing, and public discussion is carefully framed by think tanks, advertising agencies, and sympathetic media owners.
from a friend who worked in Iran I too have heard that the Mullahs are extremely corrupt and do not have the needs of the people as their top priority. I can assure you that nearly all of our elected politicians in the US fall into the same category.
Our congress critters and your Mullahs get away with what they do because it is tolerated by the opinion makers, therefore once the opinion makers no longer tolerate that behavior it will be changed.
you have to be very careful when pointing a finger at any one group, be they zionists or baptists or shia. Powerful people want to maintain their power and most of them have figured out how to do it. They will use whatever method that works to garner support from the people and often that means appealing to the public’s religious beliefs. if offering small packets of Soma returned the same result and was cheaper you can be sure they would do that.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jul 14 2007 17:20 utc | 113

dan of steele, one can’t implement your recommendations in Iran. The Mullahs shoot anything that moves: When an Iranian think-tank published the results of a nationwide poll 4 years ago (= during the relatively liberal Khatemi era when films making fun of the Mullahs were left uncensored) the poll takers were each given 4-year prison sentences. Why? Because the poll showed 70 % of the population in favour of making peace with America, a finding that was considered against Iran’s national interests (Ironically the Mullahs made America a peace offer that was rejected in May 2003, so the fierce reaction to the poll was probably meant to prevent further unsanctioned polls). In short, the only polls permitted are those whose results eiter reflect the official line, or those that are fabricated by the officials themselves. Welcome 1984.
Therefore agencies, think-tanks, etc.,. are a no-no in Iran. That’s how suffocating the control is over here. You have a far greater chance of changing things State-side.

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 14 2007 17:34 utc | 115

Mostly about NoKo, but this Iran part is interesting … By Order of the President…

So, in contrast to the appearance of restored normality in North Korean diplomacy, I’d like to put in my two cents’ worth concerning the presidential finding authorizing CIA destabilization campaign against Iran blessed by Elliott Abrams and Steven Hadley and ostentatiously leaked to ABC’s The Blotter:
The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a “nonlethal presidential finding” that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran’s currency and international financial transactions.
I think the implication of this finding—and its leak—have been misunderstood.
When one recalls that the main U.S. initiative against Iran has been to isolate the regime financially through Treasury’s Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence—the same bunch that went after North Korea—and things haven’t been going all that great, the indication here is that hardliners feel they need a better way of winning hearts and minds.
The effective threat here is, I believe, “manipulation of…international financial transactions” e.g. that some Swiss bank is going to wake up one morning and find that the CIA has hacked into its mainframe and erased a few million dollars from an Iranian account.
The Swiss aren’t supposed to like it, and the Swiss government isn’t going to like it either. But it’s supposed to convince them that the risks of handling Iranian money has been upgraded from “reputational” to “operational” and it’s better not to handle any Iranian money at all.
It would also be a sign that a lot of banks and jurisdictions have not been sufficiently responsive to Bush administration jawboning on Iran backed up by Patriot Act Section 311 threats, and the hardliners want them put on notice through a pointed leak that Elliott Abrams will be rummaging through their mainframes and twisting their testicles as punishment.
If our Commander in Chief harbored any moral qualms about extralegal financial sabotage against the financial institutions of our friends and allies, I’m sure the plan’s architects whispered that the threat would be sufficient to peal financial institutions away from Tehran…or maybe just one publicized demonstration of the Death Star would be sufficient to bring the world financial community to heel…

Posted by: b | Jul 14 2007 17:44 utc | 117

annie Thanks for providing this from the Ledeen article
“Total war not only destroys the enemy’s military forces, but also brings the enemy society to an extremely personal point of decision, so that they are willing to accept a reversal of the cultural trends,” Adam G. Mersereau, a former Marine and an Atlanta attorney, writes. “The sparing of civilian lives cannot be the total war’s first priority. . . . The purpose of total war is to permanently force your will onto another people.”
nothing new about this but I cant remember ever seeing it put so starkly by people close to the wheels of power.
this is as clear an official admission (or confession) of how so much of what we do to others (especially the black & brown) is driven by moral-superiority or has been driven by it for 500 years & still going. No news there but we cant just wish it away.
its digusting that anyone would believe that imposing ones will onto another people is more important than sparing their lives. In this case, a people who have never wished us any harm.
I think this factor does not get the attention it deserves. Sometime it does as in the Nation article ref’ed today see:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2007/07/the-nations-poe.html
quote: To wallow in a myth that trumpets our goodness, …

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Jul 14 2007 17:49 utc | 119

Never mind, either the fact that submission to force can never be willingly given, and will therefore only last as long as the balance of power is in your favor… and when it tips, then woe is you…

Posted by: Bea | Jul 14 2007 18:11 utc | 121

Air Force quietly building Iraq presence

BALAD AIR BASE, Iraq – Away from the headlines and debate over the “surge” in U.S. ground troops, the Air Force has quietly built up its hardware inside Iraq, sharply stepped up bombing and laid a foundation for a sustained air campaign in support of American and Iraqi forces.
Squadrons of attack planes have been added to the in-country fleet. The air reconnaissance arm has almost doubled since last year. The powerful B1-B bomber has been recalled to action over Iraq.
The escalation worries some about an increase in “collateral damage,” casualties among Iraqi civilians. Air Force generals worry about wear and tear on aging aircraft. But ground commanders clearly like what they see.
“Night before last we had 14 strikes from B-1 bombers. Last night we had 18 strikes by B-1 bombers,” Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch said approvingly of air support his 3rd Infantry Division received in a recent offensive south of Baghdad.
Statistics tell the story: Air Force and Navy aircraft dropped 437 bombs and missiles in Iraq in the first six months of 2007, a fivefold increase over the 86 used in the first half of 2006, and three times more than in the second half of 2006, according to Air Force data. In June, bombs dropped at a rate of more than five a day.
…Iraq Body Count, a London-based, anti-war research group that monitors Iraqi war deaths, says the step-up in air attacks appears to have been accompanied by an increase in Iraqi civilian casualties from air strikes. Based on media reports, it counts a recent average of 50 such deaths per month.
The Air Force itself does not maintain such data.

1. Who are the ones being worried about collateral damage and why aren’t they being taken seriously?
2. Who are the ground commanders quoted, who clearly like seeing the 50 killed civilians every months due to increased bombing?
2. Where were the B1 Bombers called back from, and is there possibly a chance that there is a 2nd, an ulterior motive to bring them back to the region, such as possible usage over Iran?

Posted by: Juan Moment | Jul 15 2007 1:48 utc | 123

siun, good to have you back posting , hope you stick around. bottom line, lieberman won because of the backing of republicans. they crossed party lines and supported him. or else, it was fixed. look at the numbers. we got just enough to ‘win’, staving off accusations of election fraud, but not enough to stave off a decent filibuster. you do the numbers, it was fixed.

Posted by: annie | Jul 15 2007 8:36 utc | 125

Following my email emasculation of Senator Lieberman’s press release just now, I provide you below with a Financial Times report highlighting the hypocrisy of the 97-0 Senate (“Lieberman Amendment”) Resolution on Iran. America raises ‘concerns’ with China but threatens Iran with all-out war. = Sheer hypocrisy! My comments are italicized:
US concerns over China weapons in Iraq
By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington
Published: July 6 2007 22:01 | Last updated: July 6 2007 22:01
The US has raised concerns with the Chinese government about the discovery of Chinese-made weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Richard Lawless, departing senior Pentagon official for Asia, on Friday said Washington had flagged the issue with Beijing. In recent months, the US has become increasingly alarmed that Chinese armour-piercing ammunition has been used by the Taliban in Afghanistan and insurgents in Iraq.
A senior US official recently told the FT that Iran appeared to be providing the Chinese-made weapons. He said Washington had no evidence that Beijing was complicit, but stressed that the US would like China to “do a better job of policing these sales”. Mr Lawless said the question of origin was less important than who was facilitating the transfer. (This is too hilarious for words: Although the weapons killing U.S. soldiers clearly originate in China, there is no evidence of Beijing’s complicity but hard evidence of Iran’s complicity!!!)
The concerns about Chinese weapons follow months of allegations (strongly denied by the ousted Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Pace) from US officials that Iran is helping attack US troops in Iraq, and more recently Afghanistan, by providing technology for bombs that can destroy Humvees and other heavily armoured US vehicles.
Mr Lawless also expressed concern about North Korea’s missile programme. Last week, Pyongyang tested a new short-range missile that could target not only the US military base at Pyeongtaek but also Seoul. He said North Korea was close to being able to field the solid-fuel, highly mobile rocket.
Mr Lawless said the US military relationship with China was “overall, not bad”, but there was a need for more engagement between the militaries, particularly at the senior levels. “They have been more willing to engage, but it is in millimetres and increments,” he said. (Message? = China REFUSES to cooperate with U.S. military planners/monitors, but despite this there is ‘no evidence’ of Chinese complicity!).
He said the Pentagon was disappointed that China had not given Admiral Michael Mullen, chief of naval operations, the same kind of access that his Chinese counterpart received during a visit to the US. Adm Mullen, who has since been nominated as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ended up not visiting China.
Mr Lawless also said it was important for China to hold talks with the US about its nuclear forces. A recent Pentagon report concluded Beijing was developing a more survivable nuclear force, including submarine-launched missiles, and mobile land-based missiles.
Since Presidents Hu Jintao and George W. Bush last year discussed increasing military exchanges, China has not responded to an offer for the commander of its strategic nuclear forces to visit US Strategic Command.
“There is a great shortfall in our understanding of China’s intentions,” said Mr Lawless, referring to the overall Chinese military build-up. “When you don’t know why they are doing it, it is pretty damn threatening ……….they leave us no choice but to assume the worst.” (On the one hand they “assume the worst”, but when it comes to Chinese weapons supplies to Afghanistan and Iraq they assume the best about China and the worst about Iran!?! How convenient!). And Westerners wonder why Middle Easterners maintain there is a Zionist-Neocon conspiracy to destroy the Middle East, so as to rebuild it in their own image ………….
Mr Lawless (His name is symbolic of the Pentagon) also suggested that the Pentagon had refused a request from Japan for extensive data on the F-22 fighter jet. Japan wants the data to consider whether the advanced fighter – which under current law cannot be exported – would meet its defence needs.
Mr Lawless said the Pentagon had offered Japan only basic data, which would not require a change in US law.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 15 2007 10:21 utc | 127

Parivs,
Likewise, thanks for your posts. The Internet is a great tool to help us understand this world. Let us hope those in government do not abuse this tool, but just a general thought from looking at history, what tool has not been abused by governments at one time or another? From the written word to video propaganda, to military might, all tools have been used by governments in determnintal ways. And now Internet usage is monitored by the U.S. government and others more and more.

Posted by: Rick | Jul 15 2007 11:22 utc | 129

@Parviz
…your extraordinary, conscientious efforts to prevent a military attack on my country.
It feels to me that this is so little, relative to the magnitude of what is at stake. I am glad to know that at least you take comfort from it. I truly hope you do not end up sitting among the rubble!
@Siun
Thanks for clarifying. That is important to understand and remember, and to consider… especially given all that has happened since. And welcome back.

Posted by: Bea | Jul 15 2007 19:24 utc | 131

Thanks, Bea, I had missed this one. The question boils down to whether Iran’s conventional weapons threat is a serious deterrent to the U.S./Israel. I would think so, based on my lengthy earlier description of Iran’s massive, unfettered military build-up of the past 2 decades. Katyusha 50 km-range rockets, that caused so much damage and accelerated Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, are mosquito bites in comparison with the Shahab missile series (2.000 km range) that Iran has in abundance.
Iran would not be so stupid (no, not even these religious morons) to attack preemptively. Let’s hope Israel taskes the Iranian self-defence threat seriously.

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 16 2007 5:47 utc | 133

Food for thought in the midst of Ominous Signs of War:
“All human beings are limbs of each other,
having been created of one essence.
When time afflicts a limb with pain
the other limbs cannot at rest remain.
If thou feel not for other’s misery
A HUMAN BEING IS NO NAME FOR THEE.”
(The great Iranian poet Sa’adi)

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 16 2007 6:00 utc | 135

This article from the LA Times is an anti-Neocon-Propaganda bombshell. It shows who, besides American soldiers, are killing Iraqis: And no prizes for guessing which country does NOT appear on the list of ‘bad guys’:
link
It’s also really funny reading desperate attempts by U.S. officials to defend Saudi Arabia:
“To suggest they’ve done nothing to stem the flow of people into Iraq is wrong,” said a U.S. intelligence official in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “People do get across that border. You can always ask, ‘Could more be done?’ But what are they supposed to do, post a guard every 15 or 20 paces?” (This is hilarious! The Saudis are given the benefit of the doubt for failing to capture insurgents on their tiny 814 km border with Iraq, while Iran is expected to control its own border with Iraq which at 1,458 km is almost double the length, not to mention that Iran is already overstretched on its 1,845 km border with 2 other Al Qaeda strongholds — Afghanistan and Pakistan).
Oh well, as long as the oil and kickbacks keep flowing the Saudis are the ‘good guys’ …………..

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 16 2007 9:54 utc | 137

No way. The Shah (or the CIA which brought him to power) was the cause of this entire mess to begin with!
We’ll bring back the Shah’s son if you push through a constitutional amendment making the Bush clan America’s permanent First Family. Then you won’t have problems with vote rigging, impeachment or other such unnecessary diversions….

Posted by: Parviz | Jul 17 2007 3:42 utc | 139