"Senior American officers said the increase in naval power should not be viewed as preparations for any offensive strike against Iran. But they acknowledged that the ability to hit Iran would be increased and that Iranian leaders might well call the growing presence provocative. One purpose of the deployment, they said, is to make clear that the focus on ground troops in Iraq has not made it impossible for the United States and its allies to maintain a military watch on Iran. That would also reassure Washington’s allies in the region who are concerned about Iran’s intentions.
The officials said the planned growth in naval power in the gulf and surrounding waters would be useful in enforcing any sanctions that the United Nations might impose as part of Washington’s strategy to punish Iran for what it sees as ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons. And the buildup would address another concern: that Iran could try to block oil shipments from the gulf in retaliation for United Nations sanctions or other American-led pressure.
Steps are already being taken to increase the number of minesweeping vessels and magnetic “sleds” carried by helicopters to improve the ability to counter Iranian mines that could block oil-shipping lanes, Pentagon and military officials said."
Then the grim yet resolute face of our Dear Leader will appear on our tv screens to inform us we are now at war with Iran....which is what his neocons friends have been aiming for all along:
"Yet there is little doubt that these same neoconservatives still exert the greatest influence on the thinking of our current President, and the more decorated among them still command great respect from our nation's media stars. They are as bloodthirsty as they are detached from reality, as amoral as they are radical, and it is long past the time that just a fraction of the scorn that they so plainly merit be heaped upon them.
The immediate proximate cause prompting this observation is this most repellent article in the leading neoconservative magazine, Commentary, by Arthur Herman, a History Professor at George Mason University. The article, entitled Getting Serious About Iran – a Military Option, is an all-out demand that war with Iran commence as soon as possible, and it offers a detailed plan for how the war should be executed."
3 comments:
How should war with Iran be executed?
I'm reminded of the old joke about two listeners at a piano recital. One says, "What do you think of his execution?" The other replies, "I'm in favor of it." If there is a way to kill this terrible idea of war with Iran before it spreads, I'm in favor of it.
I never wanted to live to see the U.S. undertake an empire, let alone to see our nation collapse in a foolish attempt to build one. Have these people never read to the end of the story of all previous empires throughout history? Or does their U.S. exceptionalism extend to believing that the forces of history don't apply to America?
They're so busy making their own reality they forgot to look at what was really happening.
I think the neocons are sooooo close to what they have wanted for decades that they will go for it no matter what. They have a self-deluded president and an out of balance Congress right now...
How much do you bet something strangely convenient will happen between now and the new Democratic Congress being sworn in? (I'm going with the hope that once spoken out loud, the imagined bad thing has less power....)
ellroon, we are thinking along similar lines. I hope both of us are wrong. It took the Bushies months to build up to the Iraq attack; perhaps there isn't time, no matter how they lie, to build a convincing case for invading Iran. One can hope.
Post a Comment