Report: US Has Plans to Attack Iran

[davidswanson]

By David Swanson

Detailed Pentagon plans for a military attack on Iran are far more extensive than has been reported in the U.S., according to top British military analysts. There have been occasional news reports on various strategic bombing options - both conventional and nuclear - but this is the first comprehensive look at the full range of Pentagon plans.

A new report obtained by RawStory.com concludes that the United States has made major preparations to attack Iran, and that such an attack will likely target much more than just weapons or nuclear facilities.

Raw Story's article breaking this story and including expert responses to the report is HERE.

The report as a PDF is HERE.

The authors are Dr Dan Plesch and Martin Butcher. Dr Plesch is Director of the School of Oriental and African Studies’ Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy. Martin Butcher is an international consultant on security politics.

Excerpts:

The study concludes that the US has made military preparations to destroy Iran’s WMD, nuclear energy, regime, armed forces, state apparatus and economic infrastructure within days if not hours of President George W. Bush giving the order. The US is not publicising the scale of these preparations to deter Iran, tending to make confrontation more likely. The US retains the option of avoiding war, but using its forces as part of an overall strategy of shaping Iran’s actions.

Any attack is likely to be on a massive multi-front scale but avoiding a ground invasion. Attacks focused on WMD facilities would leave Iran too many retaliatory options, leave President Bush open to the charge of using too little force and leave the regime intact.

• US bombers and long range missiles are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours.
• US ground, air and marine forces already in the Gulf, Iraq, and Afghanistan can devastate Iranian forces, the regime and the state at short notice.
• Some form of low level US and possibly UK military action as well as armed popular resistance appear underway inside the Iranian provinces or ethnic areas of the Azeri, Balujistan, Kurdistan and Khuzestan. Iran was unable to prevent sabotage of its offshore-to-shore crude oil pipelines in 2005.
• Nuclear weapons are ready, but most unlikely, to be used by the US, the UK and Israel. The human, political and environmental effects would be devastating, while their military value is limited.
• Israel is determined to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons yet has the conventional military capability only to wound Iran’s WMD programmes.

[bluestateguy]

1. The Pentagon has "plans" to attack a lot of countries

N. Korea, China, Russia, Iran, Pakistan, Cuba, Syria, etc.

The Pentagon has plans drawn up and sitting on a shelf for a lot of countries as a contingency. It doesn't mean it will happen.

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. Which of those, other than Iran, has the administration been beating

the war drums for?

Of course there are contingency plans, and several of those countries would be more dangerous to us than Iran, but it is Iran that is the terrorist state, that runs the terrorist revolutionary guard, that supports Hezbollah, that is feeding weapons to Shia insurgents, that is developing WMDs, that has spies posing as diplomats, yada yada yada.

You must be in deep denial to not see that Iran is in their sights and they are itching to pull the trigger.

[tactics]

7. the us has plans to attack CANADA!

we as soldiers and civilians expect our military leadership to have plans for ALL contingencies. if the time comes to attack, well have a plan. we have plans for the defense of america from iran. does that mean were gonna get attacked? of course not. stop being so knee-jerk.

[Solon]

15. Problem is that the last time we fought a defensive war was in WWII...

I doubt any war with Iran, Canada or whoever would have anything to do with defense, and have more to do with offense.

[tactics]

22. uh ....ww2 was offensive

we had multiple airborne invasions on one side and island hopping on the other. my original post was merely pointing out that we should expect our military leaders to have plans for anything. the military has plans for what to do if invaded by extraterrestrials. thats what they do.

[Solon]

26. Incorrect, Japan bombed a military base of ours, creating a state of war, on their initiative...

at Pearl Harbor, the next day, Hitler declared war on the United States. If your are talking about from a purely tactical point of view, though, as in not invading any other nation's territory at all, then we have never fought a defensive war yet, this includes both the War of Independence and the War of 1812.

[irislake]

21. EEEEEEK!

[tactics]

23. yes ... we want all your beer.....and moose

[mzmolly]

12. Right. I think if the R's had controll of the Senate/Congress we'd see an attack on Iran/Syria.

Thankfully, Democrats have some power again.

[debbierlus]

2. What the hell do we do????!!! Emergency action NEEDED.

Congress won't check Bush. Bush is a cornered rat, losing his top allies (Rove/Gonzalez). Sources report he is now sideing with Cheney on an attack against Iran. WTF?

Where is Congress?

Emergency action needs to be instituted now, & that means going beyond e-mail petitions and alerts.

Omg



:nuke:

[davidswanson]

5. read the report and go to

http://www.dontattackiran.org

[stillcool]

3. For like four years already...

I'm sure that as the above poster stated the U.S. has plans to attack a whole heap of countries. But making
Future
Events
Appear
Real
just seems to encourage some kind of emotional response..especially when the possibility is reiterated over and over.

[TheWraith]

6. Agreed. Talk about your excess of paranoia.

Like we haven't heard this story a hundred times before.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

8. Who is this US or United States that wants to attack Iran (not this country)

who is going to authorize THAT?

[EVDebs]

20. Chimpster, using the AUMF from Sept 2001 "as he determines"

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/sept_11/sjres23_eb.htm

"SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."

and by labelling the Republican Guard as terrorist entity and by ignoring the "clear" "situations" and "circumstances" as the embedded War Powers Resolution requires, a mere pretext for war is all that is needed.

Congress needs to return to this AUMF and the one for Iraq of Oct. 2002 and delete the 'as he determines' language.

[madrchsod]

9. ain`t going to happen

everyone has to much to lose

[John Q. Citizen]

10. I wonder if the 4.5 billion "put" on the stock market is related to plans to

bomb Iran, and the resultant oil disruptions adversely affecting the market?

[seafan]

14. Are the individual(s) placing recent "put options" on the stock market acquainted with

those who placed put options on American Airlines and United Airlines just before September 11, 2001...? And Chertoff was the head of the criminal division of DOJ at that time. Why did that investigation *not go anywhere*?



Financial News: Mystery Trader Bets Market Will Crash By Third, August 16, 2007



Suspicious Trading of Companies Affected by 9/11

This was followed up by Reuters reports, (9-20-1)

Chicago traders on Wednesday cited unusual activity in airline options up to a month before attacks on U.S. landmarks, and German bankers reported brisk activity in reinsurer Munich Re shares, adding to speculation that those behind the attacks tried to profit from their acts.

By Laura Jacobs and Thomas Atkins

and (9-22-1)

"Bundesbank President Ernst Welteke said that in addition to strange movements in airline and insurance shares there were signs of suspicious dealings in gold and oil around the time of the September 11 attacks.
``There is lots of speculation and rumors at the moment so we have to be careful. But...that there are ever clearer signs that there were activities on international financial markets which must have been carried out with the necessary expert knowledge,'' Welteke said during a break in an EU finance ministers' meeting.

`With the oil price we have seen before the attacks a fundamentally inexplicable rise in the price, which could mean that people have bought oil contracts which were then sold at a higher price,'' he said.
Gold markets also saw movements ``which need explaining.''
Welteke said the first evidence of unusual price movements emerged last Thursday, two days after the attacks.

By correspondent A. Chalomumbai

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0202/S00079.htm

[John Q. Citizen]

17. Except a war with Iran could be run without the requesit false flag, first.

Did you see the DU post on "Operation Noble Eagle?"

http://www.wesh.com/news/13949580/detail.html

[paparush]

11. This Just In - Bear Poops in Woods and Sun Rises in the East

Destroy 10,000 targets in a few hours? Like how many is a few? 1008?

[ecstatic]

13. So the next attack on American soil will be traced back to Iran

I really and truly hope our representatives are paying attention: If ANYTHING at all happens on this soil, that is allegedly of Iran's doing, we should all cry foul. Any Dem who doesn't grasp the connection is unfit to lead this country.

[killbotfactory]

16. Bring on WWIII

You can do it, Bush!

[Progressive Friend]

18. Iran is not developing nuclear weapons

The Supreme Leader (the ayatollah (not to be confused with the elected president)) is completely opposed to having a nuclear weapons program for religious reasons. The fact that the US (and its satellites in Europe and the Middle East) continue to go on and on about something that does not even exist is the greatest evidence of all that Washington wants to attack Iran (i.e. just like Washington’s lies about Iraq having WMD). The quagmire in Iraq has been the only thing that has prevented them from doing this earlier.

Iran is simply developing a peaceful nuclear program, which they have every right to do as signatories of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Note that this treaty itself was signed by the Shah puppet regime installed by the US/Britain in a brutal coup in the 1950s, and not by the new revolutionary government. Yet Iran still follows this treaty, even though it was signed by the previous, illegitimate Shah puppet regime. This is more evidence of Iran’s honesty in this issue.

The charges of Iran “aiding” the mostly Sunni Arab nationalist resistance in Iraq are also equally laughable to the lies about having a nuclear weapons program. Iran is only aiding the Maliki regime in Iraq, which Bush supports. There are also laughable lies about Iran aiding the Taliban in Afghanistan, but the Taliban was always an enemy of Iran and Iran supported the Northern Alliance against them. Even Hamid Karzai, the current US-installed puppet ruler of Afghanistan, rejects that US propaganda about Iran and says that Iran is a good neighbor. He knows that it is Pakistan that is, and always has been, aiding the Taliban.

If Washington does attack Iran, the article forgot to mention that Iran has modern anti-ship missiles that can sink US carriers in the Persian Gulf (and yes, I've already heard all the propaganda about the allegedly "unsinkable" US fleet, I don't buy that). All of the Shi’ite militias in Iraq would definitely begin to attack US troops as well, because Iran would undoubtedly issue a fatwa calling on the US to be driven out of the Middle East. Iran is also three times larger than Iraq and has mountainous terrain (a perfect setting to wage a guerrilla war), which is why Washington is afraid of a ground invasion. Any attack on Iran would be a disaster for the US.

[EVDebs]

19. Saudi Arabia may stage something and let the chips fall where they may...eom

[Prophet 451]

24. What Iran is doing is irrelevant

This isn't about what Iran is or isn't doing, it's about Bush's desire to control the Mid-East. If he can't find the evidence, it will be exagerated or spun or just plain invented.


That said, Iran is sitting on a lake of natural resources. Why do they want nuclear power instead? No, I'm not saying they're after nuclear weapons (I doubt the leaders are that stupid) but I'm a cynic, it's my nature to suspect everyone and I suspect there's something fishy about the bid for nuclear power, probably to do with the power companies.

[Progressive Friend]

28. Two reasons I think that Iran wants nuclear power plants

1. this will allow Iran to sell more of its fossil fuels to other countries.

2. it is a matter of national pride, the majority of the country wants to become more technologically advanced and not feel backwards or in any way dependent on the West.

That being said, it would be much smarter if Iran actually developed a nuclear weapons arsenal. Only then would it be safe from attack (note how diplomatic the US got with North Korea after they tested a bomb last fall). The US never would have attacked Iraq, if Iraq had really had WMDs.

[Prophet 451]

29. Disagree on the last point

You're probably right that a nuclear armed Iran would be safe but the problem is that nukes take time and in the meantime, if the US (or certain other Western powers) got even a hint that Iran was pushing for a nuclear weapon, a full-scale assault would start the next day. Now, given the current state of the US military, Iran would probably win that war but it would cause a great deal of death and destruction. Also, to be frank, I don't trust Iran's current president with a nuke (that said, I don't trust Bush with one either and didn't trust Blair when he was in power, I don't want to see anyone with a nuke).

You're probably right about the reasons for a nuclear reactor. I don't know how much oil it takes for Iran to power it's current electricity grid but it's got to be a lot. Since nuclear material is cheap in comparison to oil, there's a hefty profit to be made by moving to nuclear power. I just hope Iran has thought out what they're going to do with the radioactive waste.

[polichick]

25. "When someone shows you who they are, believe it."

That's an old Southern saying ~ and at this point we shouldn't be the slightest bit surprised by Bush's plans. He has shown who and what he is over and over again.

[polichick]

27. Pat Buchanan just said on Hardball...

...that Bush is planning to go into Iran. I want to know what Clinton, Obama and the others in Congress are doing to stop him ~ everything else should be on hold until they deal with this.

[sarcasmo]

30. If this wet dream of our Dictator and Darth Cheney comes true.

It will be the like fall of Rome.