Speaking on US television last night, US President Bush has said that he would not rule out military action against Iran. "I hope we can solve it diplomatically, but I will never take any option off the table," he said.
Iran says that its nuclear program is for energy purposes only, and has no plans to extend the program to build nuclear weapons. Bush says that Iran must be more cooperative over its suspected nuclear weapons program.
Bush's comments followed a report by Seymour Hersh, described as full of "inaccuracies" by the Pentagon, that US special forces were already in Iran on secret reconnaissance missions. Hersh uncovered the Abu Ghurayb prisoner-abuse scandal last year.
If this happens then I don't think others will just stand by and not react. Iran and the others must be building up teams in the US now.... This could be the trigger....
Question is will the other puppets go in? Will Auntie Blair be in power to help?
tell us all about their suspected weapons programs. It's clear now that America is the greater threat. Will they now disclose what they want countries like Iran? And so many ignorant Americans wonder why so many people hate them with passion. To those Americans who deplore the words and actions of Bush you have my sympathies - to the rest I'll never shed a tear for whatever befalls you.
what should ppl do if they are citizens of the US or other 'coalition of the willing' nations and are against this action? They cannot be identified seperately from the supporters (unless they adopt the 'blue bracelet' idea that was reported recently) and even if they are in a majority, that doesn't mean that their government will do as its electorate want. What should we do? If the US Bush administration wants to do this it will, regardless of what its ppl think or what the international community thinks. And no doubt the UK will fall in line right behind it again.
This is why our governments love democracy so much as it gives the illusion that the people have control over the government, which is turning out to be more and more false. More than half the UK supported the UN idea for dealing with Saddam, our secret services told those in power that invading Iraq would make the world a more dangerous place. But at the end of the day the government wanted to go to war and did!
Great .... if he does it personally ....I'm all for it, otherwise this could be a bad move.Bush should watch his mouth after his recent retractions this sort of statement seems like he has learnt nothing .
but it's a shame that lots of people in the US who have access to different sources of information still support that asshole... Maybe they got cloned...
I see a historical parallel developing with the current behavior of the USA: In March 1939, Germany invaded Czechoslovakia and the world said "fine. stop there". Then, in September of the same year, Germany invaded into Poland without warning or even a declaration of war and the world got pissed. The winter went by. Then, in April of 1940, Germany all of a sudden ordered her armies to Norway in order to steal her steel. One month later, Germany conquered her western neighbor, France, devouring her in just one week. Finally, Hitler made his biggest mistake and invaded Mother Russia—using air bombardment to announce an end to their Non-Aggression Treaty.
In parallel: Oct 2001, USA invaded Afghanistan with world support. March 2003, USA invaded Iraq and the world got pissed. As of 2005, the World is reliving the winter of 1939-1940, waiting to see what the USA will do next. Currently Bush is threatening to attack Iran, the result of which will outrage the world community but will not cause WW III. Iran is a lot like Norway: nobody will attack the USA over it, just like no major liberation operation EVER took place in Norway. But then, what if Germany...whoops, I mean the USA...ends up attacking China or Russia—that is to say, some parallel to invading France or Russia. THEN we're talking WW III. Remember that nobody made an effort to stop Germany until she had invaded Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Holland, France, Russia, Greece, and North Africa. Will the peaceful nations of the world be so patient with George Dubya? Or will they remember from Nazi Germany that bullies must be met with force before they do too much damage?
I think the U.S. needs to be liberated from Dubya's talons of self-desctruction.
Dubya seems to be the best player on the terrorists team. He feeds them with reasons to hate us and keeps offering more and more reasons all while stretching our budget and military thinner and thinner...
it will suddenly become 'necessary' to attack iran if too many americans start coming to their senses, and shrub/advisors decide they need another patriotic smokescreen to mutate us back into compliant dumb animals.
i gotta give credit to whichever psychological-manipulation experts are working behind the scenes to keep the bush train rolling over our brains. and no, that's not hysterical paranoia. read some interviews with german wwII survivors and compare what they say with what bush-supporters here are saying now.
I think if he wants to go for it then go for it, but at least wait a lil bit, cause were all ready too spread out over the world. If anything was to happen here we might not have enough resources to efficiently protect ourselves.
@Mullisoft Germany committed mass genocide on the jews. I dont see how that compares to the US. Bush is just further campaigning his war on terror like he said he would. People kept saying if he was serious about a war on terror why isnt he going after other countries. Well he went in to Afghanistan also, but now hes got his eyes on Iran, and im pretty sure also Syria comes up quite a bit, but I doubt we'll hear about them. I doubt Bush would ever be that retarded to think he could invade China. Russia could be a possibility with the new nuclear weapon they are developing that they claim is "unlike anything the world has seen before"
I am one of those Americans that did not think the War was a good Ideal; I hate the ideal that we are stuck there for a long time now. No WMD found, what a shocker. I have no Ideal why the president was such in a hurry to start the war. The war was a bad Ideal, the big threats where North Korea and Iran from the start. I am not for invading countries; it means you are stuck there for the long run. I wish we can go back to the days of "That’s not our Problem, why should we get involved!" It funny how you say everyone hates Americans, I was watching a stand up and he explained it well. We don't know who some of the other countries leaders are in the world, unless they are on TV every day. Some dumb ass tourist go to other countries and expect the people there to speak English, I only expect English to be spoken in a dozen or more countries, The problem going back to what the standup was talking about is, they (Americans) go to a country and when the native asks them, do you know who I leader is, and they say NO, then the person tries to tell them and They say, I don’t care. We don’t know and We Don’t care. That what our slogan has become of the last few decades now. Sad, but true.
The United States has the bombs,, thats why nobody messes with us..... The US alone can bring about the complete destruction of life as we know it. Sleep tight :D
Gee Sergeant Bush, do you think the Iranskis will give up as fast as the Iraqistans did. I just loved it when you dropped all those daisy cutters on those homes.
Well Pyle, we need to recruit more of our boys to go over there and do our dirty work and get themselves killed in the name of democracy.
Gee Sergeant Bush, the why you say it, it sounds prettier than a two dollar whore. Gosh I wish I could get killed in the name of democracy.
Well Pyle, I’ll see if I can arrange that for you.
An excerpt from the full SEYMOUR M. HERSH article on the New Yorker website (http://www.newyorker.com/):
"In my interviews, I was repeatedly told that the next strategic target was Iran. “Everyone is saying, ‘You can’t be serious about targeting Iran. Look at Iraq,’” the former intelligence official told me. “But they say, ‘We’ve got some lessons learned—not militarily, but how we did it politically. We’re not going to rely on agency pissants.’ No loose ends, and that’s why the C.I.A. is out of there.”
Regarding the negotiations with Iran to dismantle its nuclear technology, which the US has refused to take part in): One Western diplomat told me that the Europeans believed they were in what he called a “lose-lose position” as long as the United States refuses to get involved. “France, Germany, and the U.K. cannot succeed alone, and everybody knows it,” the diplomat said. “If the U.S. stays outside, we don’t have enough leverage, and our effort will collapse.” The alternative would be to go to the Security Council, but any resolution imposing sanctions would likely be vetoed by China or Russia, and then “the United Nations will be blamed and the Americans will say, ‘The only solution is to bomb.’”
That bit sounds familiar. 1441, anyone?
Getting such evidence is a pressing concern for the Bush Administration. The former high-level intelligence official told me, “They don’t want to make any W.M.D. intelligence mistakes, as in Iraq. The Republicans can’t have two of those. There’s no education in the second kick of a mule.”
We'll soon see how much they've learned from the last farce.
"The Pentagon’s contingency plans for a broader invasion of Iran are also being updated. Strategists at the headquarters of the U.S. Central Command, in Tampa, Florida, have been asked to revise the military’s war plan, providing for a maximum ground and air invasion of Iran. Updating the plan makes sense, whether or not the Administration intends to act, because the geopolitics of the region have changed dramatically in the last three years. Previously, an American invasion force would have had to enter Iran by sea, by way of the Persian Gulf or the Gulf of Oman; now troops could move in on the ground, from Afghanistan or Iraq. Commando units and other assets could be introduced through new bases in the Central Asian republics."
WTF? That'll mean a draft, won't it? I'm glad that I did my time in the services, they ain't gettin' a second bite outta me! ;)
"“The idea that an American attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities would produce a popular uprising is extremely illinformed,” said Flynt Leverett, a Middle East scholar who worked on the National Security Council in the Bush Administration. “You have to understand that the nuclear ambition in Iran is supported across the political spectrum, and Iranians will perceive attacks on these sites as attacks on their ambitions to be a major regional player and a modern nation that’s technologically sophisticated.” Leverett, who is now a senior fellow at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, at the Brookings Institution, warned that an American attack, if it takes place, “will produce an Iranian backlash against the United States and a rallying around the regime.”
Has anyone told Bush and co? I get the feeling that they believe the masses thinks just like they do. Thank god they do not.
I strongly suggest that you read the article. One things for sure - if you thought 2003-04 was bumpy, you ain't seen nothin yet.
*We use violence as the preferred method of achieving our objectives.
*We couch our objectives in lofty rhetoric, often invoking religion.
*We kill unarmed people and justify their deaths.
*We torture those brave enough to take up arms against us but maintain that, even in doing this, we are still the virtuous side in the conflict.
@tin robot: What all Americans are dying to do? Please don't make this about American citizens. You know at least half of them didn't want Bush in each of the last two elections, don't you?
@mullisoft:I find one flaw in your reasoning, and that is a lack of including the historic friction between Islamic states and the West. The U.S. (with justification) invaded Afghanistan, an Islamic state. Then it invaded Iraq without provocation. An invasion of Iran without provocation could spark WWIII, right then and there. I would imagine the Saudi royals would either turn on the U.S. or be overthrown by their own people. That would probably tip the scales so that Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, etc. would join together (in what Bush would quickly dub the Axis, or if he was being unguarded, the Mohammedans). They'd probably have little trouble gaining support from much of Europe, as well as Canada and Mexico. Then the U.S. would be doomed.
@sixstringsamurai: Ever hear of a little place called Abu Ghraib? What about Camp X-Ray? Given, these are not the Jewish holocaust, but that's not very comforting, is it? Make no mistake -- we're committing atrocities left and right. You know Bush won't agree to the U.S. being held accountable in a world court for war crimes, don't you? Why would he do that unless he was fairly certain we'd committed them and would keep doing it?
Right now terrorism is raging in Sudan. But Bush does nothing about it. Maybe the people of Sudan need to put together a nice PowerPoint presentation for Bush about their most lucrative exports; Bush seems to think "terrorism" means "Arabs controlling oil resources."
I believe terrorism exists in N. Ireland as well, but we'll of course not touch that one ...
It is interesting.. this quest to remove the tyrants from the world because of the choice of targets. First Iraq and now Iran, both lucrative in terms of the oil benefits. What about Zimbabwe? The US will NEVER go and fight there no matter how atrocious the conditions.. and how mych of an evil tyrant their dictator is. He makes Hussain look like Mickey Mouse.
Now if Zimbabwe had something lucrative...
Bush is easily the worlds biggest threat and has simply ensured that the US is considered a threat to most of the world rather than an ally or a friend. And thus this thought is passed onto the US citizens, half of which deserve it of course for being stupid enough to vote for him for religious or other stupid reasons.
Four more years - one thing is for sure, he will leave US in a state that will never be fixed.. economically, status wise and everything else.
Christ! Does this blood thirsty bastard EVER give up?!?!? I don't know if his interests are just the oil, ethnic cleansing, plans on blowing up every country that has a negative view of America (which went from the Arab world to just about the entire world since he was elected). I SOOOO want to expatriate! Anyone out there successfully expatriate from America without marriage? I can bribe Indian officials, but don't really care to live there. Anyone know the fast-line in Canada, UK, Brazil, or Spain?
