US War with Iran: Bagdad Offensive and Accusations Against Iran Intensify; US Attack on Iran Expected by William H. White April 30, 2008
As we conclude in our April 7, 2008 report, "the Bush administration is likely to throw more resources at the US military's now weakened Shiite flank and proceed as though it succeeded. So we expect the Bush administration:
to continue to back its now diminished Shiite partners by increasing operations against and laying siege to the Mahdi Army controlled areas of Baghdad;
to quickly rebuild/reinforce its offensive capabilities around Basra before resuming operations against the Mahdi Army there;
to maintain an overall state of conflict and anti-Iranian environment in Iraq, especially increasing the frequency and volume of apparently baseless accusations that Iran is underwriting attacks against US coalition forces, much as the Weapons of Mass Destruction theme was used to justify the 2003 invasion of Iraq, meeting requests for evidence with new accusations, which the media dutifully report without qualification."
Since then events have continued to build toward a US attack on Iran, with little movement away from war, after a brief period of cooperation between the Iraqi and Iranian governments to arrange a cease fire in Basra, the situation continues to deteriorate, including repeated US accusations against Iran and Moqtada al-Sadr's threats of a reciprocal escalation for the increasingly bloody siege by US and Iraqi government forces of the Shiite ghettoized slum, Sadr City, in Baghdad.
Event Summary:
While we do not discuss specific military deployments, the Bush administration continues its build-up of air, naval and special operations forces in theater, with a flurry of visits by US defense officials to "allies" whose bases or air space would be needed to support the attack on Iran.
Secret Bush "Finding" Widens War on Iran, as reported by CounterPunch's Andrew Cockburn on May 2, 2008, "Six weeks ago, President Bush signed a secret finding authorizing a covert offensive against the Iranian regime that, according to those familiar with its contents, 'unprecedented in its scope.'" This indicates the predicted Iran-Iraq border operations have been given a green light.
US and Iraqi government forces have laid siege to approximately 3 million people of Sadr City, a mostly Shiite slum in Baghdad, the US command claiming it only wants to stop rocket attacks on the Green Zone, when in fact the US began the offensive in March, long before there were any rocket attacks from Sadr City, while the Mahdi Army had been observing a six month long cease fire. Shiite Iran, which has attempted to mediate a cease fire in Baghdad, as it had in Basra, has repeatedly objected to the US offensive. The US operation, where Shiites supporting the US occupation of Iraq are attacking Shiites opposed to the US occupation, is turning this vast slum into a ghetto, as it is increasingly cut off from the rest of Baghdad and subject to daily military assault, creating a profound provocation of Iran that is essentially invisible to the US public.
Iran remains confidant a US attack is unlikely, which is unfortunate because it may lead to ill advised actions or inactions on the part of the Iranians; however, it is also likely that such statements are being accompanied by Iranian defense preparations, perhaps including assistance with its air defense systems provided by Russia, easily observed by US reconnaissance, as a warning to the Bush administration.
Promotion of General Petraeus, replacing Admiral William Fallon as head of U.S. Central Command, or Centcom, which oversees US military activity throughout the Middle East. The US Congress is expected to rubber stamp the promotion, placing this very political, can-do general where he can do the most harmful bidding of the Bush administration.
Pictures recently released by the US of Syrian site bombed by Israel on September 6, 2007 appeared to have been doctored [additional analysis]. In addition, there has been a concerted effort to link North Korea to Syrian site, and, in likely short order, to Iran as well.
A New Casus Belli: "Iran Is Killing US Troops"
It now appears the Bush administration has augmented and subordinated the nuclear issue and naval incident as casus belli to the "Iran is killing US troops" propaganda offensive, which immerged with the invention of the so-called "Special Groups" by the US military command, first mentioned by the US Military Command in Iraq on July 2, 2007. They took on new life at the end of March 2008, as reported by Agence France-Presse (AFP) on March 26, 2008, when military spokesman Major General Kevin Bergner, as part of the US Military's effort to "document" Iranian sponsored operations in Iraq, revealed these "Iranian-supported Special Group criminals" were apparently and suddenly everywhere.
170.000 US + 90000 fragile-loyaliraqis versus approximately 20 million hateful djihadists. No borders for them . iRAN is wide open.
The US are outnumbered. Position of Russia China is fragile.
With a CinC change within 7 month time , no way to launch such a large scale military operation. GEN PEtraeus should advise in good order retreat into safe grounds for now.Even if it means separation at gunpoint
from the fragile-loyal forces. Reason : we are not ready for that.Too many open questions including homefront issues here a few examples:
1) United 93 wingspann B757 1.4 larger then the impact groove in the Pentagon , was it a faked crash only ? 2)Seperatistic culture churches , obama speech needs bitter gunholders clinging to bible(codeword for Quaran) ?
Fort Dix bombings,wrapmusic text in Wrap music over internet advises the gunholders to stack explosives. What's going on here ?
3)15 million muslim descent citizens unsupervised/unmonitored within the states. Sleepers among them ?
4) iraq has 18 provinces ,14 of them welcome the USA as liberators, other 4 want to have us out. We need to do maneuvering accordingly to satisfy the desires of all the people peacefully. On the other hand , good question , ratio 14/18 , can we also expect such an appreciable ratio of welcoming in IRAN ?
Islamism IS Islam. At most, there is a difference in degree, not in kind. Islam hasn't declared a world war. Islam IS a world war"
by
hlg (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 79 comments)
on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 2:23:26 AM
14 provinces welcome Americans as liberators my ass. This is American delusionalism.
"Islam is world war" is pure projection by war-mongering Christian Jihadists who think they have to kill a billion Moslems to ensure the Rapture. These are the really sick F*cks! Are you one of them?
by
Mac McKinney (49 articles, 83 quicklinks, 204 diaries, 1216 comments)
on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 9:22:33 AM
War With Iran Will Begin With A False-Flag Attack On Denver
There are two things not mentioned in the above article to consider. An attack on Iran will be unprovoked and WILL include nuclear weapons. In order to justify a nuclear strike, there will have to be a nuclear attack on the US that can be blamed on Iran. We know that at least some of the Democratic Party will oppose this vigorously. Therefore, the scenario that sounds most plausible to me is the following:
A nuclear, false-flag attack on Rocky Flats Nuclear Power Plant in Arvada, Co. to coincide with the Democratic Convention in Denver. Below are my reasons for thinking such an attack is likely.
1. By this article's own research, Bush envisions an Iranian attack to occur between May and early July. The Democratic Convention in Denver is in late June.
2. Rocky Flats contains, by one Economist magazine estimate, 56 tons worth of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium that can't be moved to Yucca Mountain as no state or municipality will allow transport of the material over their territory.
3. The neocons need a terrorist attack on the US of an order-of-magnitude greater than 9/11 to provide the necessary pretext for both the attack on Iran and the imposition of martial law. Remember also that Bush and the neocons look at the Democrats as their TRUE enemies.
4.A nuclear strike on Rocky Flats would vaporize the entire Denver metropolitan area, wiping out a very blue part of an otherwise red state and killing virtually all the domestic opposition leadership, making imposition of martial law easier to accomplish.
5.Such a strike, blamed on Iran, would allow the neocons a fig leaf of bipartisanship as they "avenge" the attack on their domestic enemies and allow either the cancellation of elections or a hand-picked "government of national unity" to include so-called Democrats like Liebermann and HRC.
6.Such a strike would allow the imposition of all Continuity-of-Government directives like NSPD-51 to be imposed. This would allow the roundup of people who oppose the war and other "Regime threats" to the new Homeland Security Gulag being constructed by Halliburton.
The reasons I list for warning of such an attack are as follows:
1. I spent 6 years in the US Navy as a member of the Personnel Reliability Program, Nuclear Weapons Handling Teams, Nuclear Security Alert Forces, and Nuclear Accident/Incident Teams. I participated in Nuclear Weapons Acceptance Inspections, Nuclear Technical Proficiency Inspections and Technical Surprise Inspections. I specialized in precision-guided weaponry for both Anti-submarine and anti-ship capabilities. I also lived in Denver for 4 years.
2.We know Bush and his cronies are deathly afraid of impeachment and war crimes trials for very good reason. We also know they will stop at nothing to secure their position. They weren't worried about Hillary as President because she will squelch all investigations into Bush admin wrongdoing just like Bill did with the Reagen and GHW Bush admins. Obama is the wild card they have to prevent.
3. Once it begins to look like Obama WILL get the Democratic Nomination, look for the Clintons to find a reason to not attend the Convention. If you see that happen, get out of Colorado right away as the attack is imminent.
4.Knowing what I know about weapons and these guys, this is the one target that fulfills all their goals in one action. If I was in their shoes, this is what I would do.
Call me...Ishmael
I was in Guantanamo before it became fashionable
by
Ishmael1 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 36 comments)
on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 12:06:02 PM
NOT covered at all by the MSM but clearly overheard on a local radio news program recently that AP announed that Iran has now completely abandoned the falling dollar and converted their oil sales to euros and the yaun entirely.
Having to purchase a barrel of oil from Iran in euros, primarily, will mean huge increases at the pump due to the slumping dollar.
Resolving this urgent problem for drivers everywhere will mean getting back to strengthening the "green back" by paying our bills by raising our revenues through "pay as you go", raising our taxes, not the current "borrow & spend" Bushco policy for monetary and economic woe, and having our "off the hook" corporations volunteer all their billions of excess profits for cutting the federal deficit.
Once the dollar can purchase 2 euros the price at the pump would become affordable again.
by
Gene Cappa (38 articles, 0 quicklinks, 76 diaries, 285 comments)
on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 12:27:53 PM
Good article, Bill. I see you brought out a few nutcases here. Your article is a warning, not a prediction. Some simply can't understand that, and I just happen to know that you sincerely hope you are wrong.
by
Sandy Shanks (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 46 comments)
on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 1:47:07 PM
What scares me is the hair brain on the hair trigger. I figure a Gulf of Tonkin black flag in the Persian gulf and the cod piece commander ordering a retaliation from the carriers in the gulf at the time. Like last time, the unpatriotic congress will cave and there is no way to stop the escalation to the battle field nukes. Why build um if you can't use them.
Beware the new moon ,like tonight, in the coming months.
Was the PBS "Carrier" series a move to bond us to our most vulnerable troops stationed in the gulf?
by
tjb (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 242 comments)
on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 4:44:32 PM
Iran has now opened an oil bourse which does not accept U.S. dollars. Many fear that rhis will give added reason for the U.S. to topple the Iranian regime as a means to close the bourse and revert Iran's oil transaction currency to USDs. It's still about oil but the real issue is the medium of exchange for oil, not the oil itself. Most oil sales throughout the world are denominated in United States dollars (USD). Because most countries rely on oil imports, they are forced to maintain large stockpiles of dollars in order to continue imports. This causes demand for USDs to remain high, regardless of economic conditions in the United States. This allows the US government to gain revenues by issuing bonds at lower interest rates than they otherwise would be able to. As a result the U.S. government can run higher budget deficits at a more sustainable level than can most other countries. If the euro replaces the dollar as the medium of exchange for oil, the value of the dollar would plunge to a historically low level.
If the euro becomes the trading currency for oil, the U.S. would experience the double whammy of skyrocketing oil prices and an inability to finance its huge deficits, both of which would combine to produce an economic crisis of mammoth proportions.
In 2000, Iraq converted all its oil transactions under the Oil for Food program to euros. When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, it returned oil sales from the euro to the USD. When people say that the Iraq war was about oil, they are only half right. The other half was about keeping the USD as the medium of exchange for oil. The situation is the same for Iran.
by
Joe Parko (10 articles, 3 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 17 comments)
on Saturday, May 3, 2008 at 9:55:31 PM
7 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
