U.S. preparations for invading Iran are complete
AirRaid Mach 2.5
US preparations for invading Iran are complete: Report
Rashmee Roshan Lal
[ 16 Feb, 2007 2050hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
LONDON: American preparations for invading Iran are complete and a
major conventional war with Teheran could begin any day, according to
a chilling new report that coincides with leading US Democrat
Congressmen's warning to President Bush that he does not have the
authority to go to war with Iran.
The report, by authoritative defence expert Dan Plesch, says American
military operations for Iran "extend far beyond targeting suspect WMD
facilities and will enable President Bush to destroy Iran's military,
political and economic infrastructure overnight using conventional
weapons."
Plesch, who is known to be well-connected and well-networked at the
very highest reaches of the trans-Atlantic political and defence
establishment, quoted unnamed British military sources to say that
"the US military switched its whole focus to Iran" as soon as Saddam
Hussein was kicked out of Baghdad.
He said his sources added that the US has continued this target-Iran
strategy ever since, even though the American infantry continues to be
bogged down fighting the insurgency in Iraq.
In an assertion that has astonished European capitals, the defence
guru claimed that despite the gross failure to re-build post-Saddam
Iraq, American hubris extends to plans for a "peaceful" post-invasion
"settlement" for Iran. This plan will seek to create a federal nation,
an "Iran of the regions", he said.
Pointing out that two years ago, the Congress of Iranian Nationalities
for a Federal Iran had its inaugural meeting in London, Plesch said,
"We should not underestimate the Bush administration's ability to
convince itself that an 'Iran of the regions' will emerge from a post-
rubble Iran."
Plesch's revelations and extraordinary claims form the cover-story of
this week's generally staid, anti-interventionist and left-leaning New
Statesman magazine. They come within days of a surge in Washington
rhetoric over Iran. Just five days ago, senior American officials
devastatingly told the world that deadly new "explosively formed
penetrators", which have killed 170 US soldiers in Iraq, are "coming
from the highest levels of the Iranian government".
Soon after, Bush himself declared that "if Iran escalates its military
action in Iraq to the detriment of our troops and/or innocent Iraqi
people, we will respond firmly".
Defence experts said the revelation that America's military planning
is advanced and well-calibrated to wipe out chunks of Iran's
installations and infrastructure and could lay bare swathes of the
country was bound to scare policy makers and diplomats on both sides
of the Atlantic.
The experts pointed out that Plesch's claims come in the very week
American House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi was forced
publicly to restrain Bush with a cutting response to the president's
pious claims he wants a diplomatic solution to the rift with Iran.
Pelosi said, "I take him at his word", only to add the US Congress
must assert itself "and make it very clear that there is no previous
authority for the president, any president, to go into Iran."
Plesch's report claimed the US Army, Navy, Air Force and marines have
all prepared battle plans and spent four years building bases and
training for "Operation Iranian Freedom". He added that Admiral
Fallon, the new head of US Central Command, has inherited computerised
plans under the name TIRANNT (Theatre Iran Near Term).
He chillingly claimed, "US defence establishment's programme called
"Global Strike" means that, without any obvious signal, what was done
to Serbia and Lebanon can be done overnight to the whole of Iran." He
added saying, "We, and probably the Iranians, would not know about it
until after the bombs fell. Forces that hide will suffer the fate of
Saddam's armies, once their positions are known."
He added, "The whole of Iran is now less than an hour's flying time
from some American base or carrier. Sources in the region as well as
trade journals confirm that the US has built three bases in Azerbaijan
that could be transit points for troops and with facilities equal to
its best in Europe."
Plesch claims that "post-9/11, the US Navy can put six carriers into
battle at a month's notice, with each carrier force including hundreds
of cruise missiles."
Plesch added that several US marine forces are already "assembling,
each with its own aircraft carrier. These carrier forces can each
conduct a version of the D-Day landings. They come with landing craft,
tanks, jump-jets, thousands of troops and, yes, hundreds more cruise
missiles. Their task is to destroy Iranian forces able to attack oil
tankers and to secure oilfields and installations. They have trained
for this mission since the Iranian revolution of 1979."
The report said that "any US general planning to attack Iran can now
assume that at least 10,000 targets can be hit in a single raid, with
warplanes flying from the US or Diego Garcia...With little military
effort, the US air force can hit the last-known position of Iranian
military units, political leaders and supposed sites of weapons of
mass destruction. One can be sure that, if war comes, George Bush will
not want to stand accused of using too little force and allowing Iran
to fight back."
Freeman
> http://tinyurl.com/23rcp3
>
> US preparations for invading Iran are complete: Report
> Rashmee Roshan Lal
> [ 16 Feb, 2007 2050hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
>
The original article appears to be ...
Dan Plesch, "Iran - Ready to attack", New Statesman, cover date of 19
Feb. 2007
http://www.newstatesman.com/200702190014
AirRaid
thanks for that, interesting,.
AirRaid
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/23rcp3
>
> > US preparations for invading Iran are complete: Report
> > Rashmee Roshan Lal
> > [ 16 Feb, 2007 2050hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
>
> The original article appears to be ...
> Dan Plesch, "Iran - Ready to attack", New Statesman, cover date of 19
Freeman
The article contains rather speculative generalities about potential
preparations over the last four years. But I agree, this is more-or-
less the last ditch for the petro-imperialists: only two more years
"guaranteed" Bush-time in which to complete their Persian-Gulf oil-
empire project.
And potential trial, etc, for treason and mass-murder if they don't.
Tehran, Riyadh, police-state -- or bust.
Mark Test
news:1171899616.9...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 17, 5:23 pm, "AirRaid" <airraid.mach...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 17, 5:38 am, "Freeman" <libertystrikesb...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 16, 11:15 pm, "AirRaid Mach 2.5" <AirRaid...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >http://tinyurl.com/23rcp3
> >
> > > > US preparations for invading Iran are complete: Report
> > > > Rashmee Roshan Lal
> > > > [ 16 Feb, 2007 2050hrs ISTTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
> >
> > > The original article appears to be ...
> > > Dan Plesch, "Iran - Ready to attack", New Statesman, cover date of 19
> > > Feb. 2007http://www.newstatesman.com/200702190014
> >
> > thanks for that, interesting,.
>
> The article contains rather speculative generalities about potential
> preparations over the last four years. But I agree, this is more-or-
> less the last ditch for the petro-imperialists: only two more years
> "guaranteed" Bush-time in which to complete their Persian-Gulf oil-
> empire project.
>
you are suggesting the US suddenly has decided to steal it?
Mark
T3
"Mark Test" <MAR...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:cmmCh.3435$_73....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> The article contains rather speculative generalities about potential
>> preparations over the last four years. But I agree, this is more-or-
>> less the last ditch for the petro-imperialists: only two more years
>> "guaranteed" Bush-time in which to complete their Persian-Gulf oil-
>> empire project.
>>
> Well, since the US does not get a single drop of Iranian oil.....I suppose
> you are suggesting the US suddenly has decided to steal it?
Heh, that didn't stop us from invading Iraq, did it? Oddly enough, we still
don't get any of it, though when the dust finally settles, China prolly
will...
Mark Test
news:45d9f6f8$0$28086$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
about the oil...
T3
> still
>> don't get any of it, though when the dust finally settles, China prolly
>> will...
>>
> So true....my point of course is that the left always say it's
> about the oil...
It *is/was* about oil and really nothing else, unless of course you think
it's sand, or something like that, 'cause it damn sure wasn't about 9/11,
WMD's, or for that matter democracy...
Peter Skelton
Interesting that a bright boy like yu can be so obviously wrong,
isn't it?
Peter Skelton
Mark Test
of its oil from the mid-east..(Saudi).
Mark
Mark Test
news:45lkt21q90avmg1ai...@4ax.com...
does however fight to preserve the flow of oil.....since it's disruption
would affect the price of oil on the world market.
That whole Bush "Persian oil empire" crack is what I was commenting
on.
Mark
Peter Skelton
<MAR...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
I haven't implied anyting like that at all
>That whole Bush "Persian oil empire" crack is what I was commenting
>on.
>
Well you chose to do so by saying that the left always say it's
about the oil, an obviously fallacious crack.
Peter Skelton
Mark Test
Peter Skelton
wrote:
I have said nothing like that.
Mark Test
Didn't say you did.....that's the crack I was replying to though....
And I've yet to hear reasons like, to promote democracy, to
maintain stability, to remove a dictator.....from the left.
Only it's about the oil.....is what the majority on the left spew.
Mark
Freeman
> "Freeman" <libertystrikesb...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
Hardly suddenly.
Freeman
> "T3" <spamb...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:45da207c$0$28126$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Mark Test" <MARK...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
> >news:s4pCh.3489$x74....@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > "T3" <spamb...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > >> Heh, that didn't stop us from invading Iraq, did it? Oddly enough, we
> > > still
> > >> don't get any of it, though when the dust finally settles, China prolly
> > >> will...
>
> > > So true....my point of course is that the left always say it's
> > > about the oil...
>
> > It *is/was* about oil and really nothing else, unless of course you think
> > it's sand, or something like that, 'cause it damn sure wasn't about 9/11,
> > WMD's, or for that matter democracy...
>
> All about oil?.....oil that the US never needed. The US gets only 16%
> of its oil from the mid-east..(Saudi).
The petro-imperialists are *aiming* to get a lot more. Or at least
have Europe and China by the bollocks.
Freeman
> "Peter Skelton" <skelt...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:45lkt21q90avmg1ai...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 21:58:48 GMT, "Mark Test"
>
> > >"T3" <spamb...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > >news:45d9f6f8$0$28086$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> > >> "Mark Test" <MARK...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
> > >>news:cmmCh.3435$_73....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > >> >> The article contains rather speculative generalities about potential
> > >> >> preparations over the last four years. But I agree, this is
> more-or-
> > >> >> less the last ditch for the petro-imperialists: only two more years
> > >> >> "guaranteed" Bush-time in which to complete their Persian-Gulf oil-
> > >> >> empire project.
>
> > >> > Well, since the US does not get a single drop of Iranian oil.....I
> > >suppose
> > >> > you are suggesting the US suddenly has decided to steal it?
>
> > >> Heh, that didn't stop us from invading Iraq, did it? Oddly enough, we
> > >still
> > >> don't get any of it, though when the dust finally settles, China prolly
> > >> will...
>
> > >So true....my point of course is that the left always say it's
> > >about the oil...
>
> > Interesting that a bright boy like yu can be so obviously wrong,
> > isn't it?
>
> Don't imply that it's the US that wants or needs mid-east oil. The US
> does however fight to preserve the flow of oil.....since it's disruption
> would affect the price of oil on the world market.
Oil-as-power is another real possibility. To be gatekeeper of the
supplies ...
http://us.geocities.com/libertystrikesback/kissex.html
wka...@vic.com
wrote:
>"T3" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
I like to ask the proponents of the "petro-imperialist" theory to tell
me, specifically, which oil companies have delivered how much "stolen"
oil to the U.S. This question generally causes them to be very
flumoxxed and to drool upon themselves as they try for an answer.
Bill Kambic
Haras Lucero, Kingston, TN
Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão
Defendario
> And I've yet to hear reasons like, to promote democracy
Which isn't happening. The neighborhoods of Basra which have been
controlled by militant gangs mostly live under Sharia law now.
> maintain stability
You think we have created stability in Iraq?
LOL
> to remove a dictator
He was *our* guy. A moderate Arab with whom we can do business.
Isn't that what gladhanding Don Rumsfailed said?
>from the left
What Left? You want to talk to the Left -- c'est moi!
>
> Only it's about the oil.....is what the majority on the left spew.
>
It is about the oil, fool.
http://www.juancole.com/2006/09/bush-turns-to-fear-mongering-creation.html
Be sure to take note of the image:
http://www.juancole.com/graphics/reserves2.jpg
> Mark
>
>
>
Defendario
>
> Oil-as-power is another real possibility. To be gatekeeper of the
> supplies ...
> http://us.geocities.com/libertystrikesback/kissex.html
>
Interesting link
>