Dick Cheney suggests Iran has restarted it's WMD program...

[HotHotHeat]

This week everyone's favorite Dick is on an all expense paid vacation to the middle-east, to 'discuss Iran's nuclear programme' with various nations.

Cheney focuses on Iranian project
By Daniel Dombey
Published: March 20 2008 02:00 | Last updated: March 20 2008 02:00
Dick Cheney, US vice-president, said yesterday that Iran might have restarted work on nuclear weapons, writes Daniel Dombey in Washington . Speaking in Oman on a tour of the Middle East in part focused on rallying the region's leaders against Tehran, Mr Cheney said the current status of Iran's programme was unclear.

Last year, a US national intelligence estimate said it had "high confidence" that Iran's weaponisation work had halted in 2003, adding with "moderate confidence" that it had not been resumed as of mid-2007.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/307a6782-f...077b07658.html

Washington insists it seeks a diplomatic solution to the standoff, but Cheney warned in 2005 that Israel might decide to use military force against Iran's nuclear programme.
US President George W. Bush claims that Iran is racing to develop nuclear weapons, something denied by Tehran, which has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Iran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes and that it has the right to pursue it.
Ahead of talks with the sultan, Cheney took a break from the strains of Middle East diplomacy and headed into waters off Oman's coast for some deep-sea fishing aboard a borrowed 60-foot (18-metre) royal yacht.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5...VdTKkxO6q_T0Ow

Also, a bit of commentary from a Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law:

Is the Bush administration ramping up for an attack on Iran? The signs seem to point in that direction. On March 11, Navy Adm. William Fallon, commander of the U.S. forces in the Middle East, retired early because of differences with Washington on Iran policy. And now, Dick Cheney's current Middle East tour may be designed to prepare our Arab allies for an imminent "preemptive" war against Iran.

Bush and Cheney have long been rattling the sabers in Iran's direction. The disaster they created in Iraq isn't going well, no matter how they spin it. They may feel that engaging the United States militarily in Iran would make it harder to elect anyone other than the seasoned military man, John McCain. The Republican presidential candidate just happens to be touring Iraq with Sen. Joe Lieberman, one of the strongest advocates of a U.S. military strike on Iran. Lieberman is likely on McCain's short list for a vice-presidential running mate.

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8371

Is the Bush Admin making a case for a preemptive attack before they leave office?

[arsenal]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Is the Bush Admin making a case for a preemptive attack before they leave office?

Yes. the only problem now is that I imagine that most people are not paying that much attention to it, and are paying more attention to the presidential nominations.

They have been rattling sabers warning of Iran for at least the last 6 months. It got more press before the battle got hot between Clinton and Obama.

[icarus]

When the intelligence report came out last year that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons programme there were a lot of people who doubted the report (no doubt many of them with an agenda). Israel's intelligence agencies maintained that the US report was wrong and that Iran was continuing to work in secret on nuclear weapons.

It appears Cheney is siding with the Israelis against his own intelligence agencies' findings. Wouldn't be the first time he's ignored the CIA.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Is the Bush Admin making a case for a preemptive attack before they leave office?

Haven't they really been trying to make a case for attacking Iran since they got into Iraq?

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Haven't they really been trying to make a case for attacking Iran since they got into Iraq?

Definitely. This week however the rhetoric is turning into action, or so some would suggest.

From one of the articles above:
News reports on Monday announced that Dick Cheney is on a surprise weeklong visit to Iraq, Israel, the occupied Palestinian territories, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Turkey. High on Cheney's agenda is the topic of U.S. policy toward Iran.

Connect the dots. They paint a very frightening picture.

Keep in mind Bush can still do whatever the hell he wants for the next nine months, regardless of where the media's attention is, this guy is where the buck stops. It's flat out eerie.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Definitely. This week however the rhetoric is turning into action, or so some would suggest.

From one of the articles above:
News reports on Monday announced that Dick Cheney is on a surprise weeklong visit to Iraq, Israel, the occupied Palestinian territories, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Turkey. High on Cheney's agenda is the topic of U.S. policy toward Iran.

Connect the dots. They paint a very frightening picture.

Consider the source of that article. I'm not saying they aren't planning anything (they obviously have been and probably still are). He's been saying that a war in Iran is looming for quite a while now, so this visit offers him a very big chance to go "Look! Look see! He's going over there!"

I don't really know what I'm arguing for or against here, I'm just saying the source is a bit hard to trust 100%

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Keep in mind Bush can still do whatever the hell he wants for the next nine months, regardless of where the media's attention is, this guy is where the buck stops. It's flat out eerie.

I don't like these crooks either but they can't do whatever the hell they want. Even the suckers who still trust them today won't fall for this trick again.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Consider the source of that article. I'm not saying they aren't planning anything (they obviously have been and probably still are). He's been saying that a war in Iran is looming for quite a while now, so this visit offers him a very big chance to go "Look! Look see! He's going over there!"

I don't really know what I'm arguing for or against here, I'm just saying the source is a bit hard to trust 100%

Ya, it's a commentary/opinion piece. No peer editing or anything. She still proposes what I could easily see as being a likely scenario.

Then again apparently I'm a conspiracy theorist.

The news articles are careful to point out it wouldn't be the US invading Iran, it would be the states in the middle east. Didn't the US just 'modernize' one of these country's armies a few weeks ago?

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Then again apparently I'm a conspiracy theorist.

You are, and you're a flames fan, but I still sorta like you

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

You are, and you're a flames fan, but I still sorta like you

Yeah, I don't care what everybody else says about you HotHotHeat, I think you're a pretty good guy.




Seriously you bring up a lot of news stories that it's well to keep an eye on.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't like these crooks either but they can't do whatever the hell they want. Even the suckers who still trust them today won't fall for this trick again.

Actually Rouge, they can. Congress has given Bush the ability to unilaterally attack any nation he deems as a threat to American national security. Iran is quickly falling into that category according to the Bush Administration. Congress gave him the keys to the candy store without realizing the guy was a diabetic, and now they can't get them away until he's out of office.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Keep in mind Bush can still do whatever the hell he wants for the next nine months, regardless of where the media's attention is, this guy is where the buck stops. It's flat out eerie.

Yeah, he can do whatever he wants with a Democratic Congress.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

I think we'd be wise not to overstate the Iran/Iraq comparison. It was never very likely that Iraq had vast stores of dangerous WMDs lying around after years and years of sanctions, U.N. inspections that turned up nothing, and the complete cluster-you-know-what that was Saddam's government. Hindsight may be 20/20--but in hindsight it seems very obvious that WMDs were never a legitimate rationale.

Iran is a bit of a different story, IMO. They have more money, a bigger military, a more stable government and a more apocalyptic view (at least among the religious elite) of their relationship with America. Nukes in those hands would be a very scary thing indeed. It's unfortunate that the U.S. has used up both its military might and its international credibility in Iraq--because both are things that might well come in handy now. I'm not going to lie--Iran scares the hell out of me. That's not to say that a war is a fantastic idea--there's pretty much no way the depleted U.S. military can pose much of a threat to Iran right now, especially if they have nuclear weapons, or are close to having them.

Conversely, Iran probably doesn't want a piece of the U.S. either. Maybe the solution is somewhere in between--an embargo paired with targeted strikes at suspected nuclear facilities? I don't know--I sort of feel like Bush has used up all the good options, and the only options left are bad ones.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yeah, he can do whatever he wants with a Democratic Congress.

Uh Sparky, you are aware that the powers granted to Bush after 9/11 are still valid? If Bush wants to go into Iran, he can order the military to go into Iran. Congress (the Republican controlled one at the time) gave the President the power he required to command the military as he saw fit. The resolution has been passed. There's no going back now.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Uh Sparky, you are aware that the powers granted to Bush after 9/11 are still valid? If Bush wants to go into Iran, he can order the military to go into Iran. Congress (the Republican controlled one at the time) gave the President the power he required to command the military as he saw fit. The resolution has been passed. There's no going back now.

How many times have you called Azure "Sparky" in the last 24 hours?

That HAS to be some kind of record!

[badnarik]

The u.s has a quarter of a million personnel and load of equipment parked next door to iran. I would say they are in prime position for a fight. And of course mccain would benefit if something happens prior to the election.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by badnarik

The u.s has a quarter of a million personnel and load of equipment parked next door to iran. I would say they are in prime position for a fight. And of course mccain would benefit if something happens prior to the election.

Thats true, however those troops are pretty tied up in the continuing occupation and pacification of Iraq. I doubt that they can spare them for a march into Iran. It would have been different if the Iraqi military and police were at a point where they could take over the defense of their own country.

The prevelant strategy would be to stand off on Iran, bomb it back to the 10th century, destroy anything taller then a story tall, destroy their water works and electrical grid and force them to rebuild.

Even though I think that the American military could pound out the Iranian Military due to the fact that America could establish control of the air very quickly, the Yanks can afford and don't have the manpower to occupy both countries.

[North East Goon]

This would be a legendary mistake of epic proportions - which leads me to believe that Bush and Cheney will do it!

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Thats true, however those troops are pretty tied up in the continuing occupation and pacification of Iraq. I doubt that they can spare them for a march into Iran. It would have been different if the Iraqi military and police were at a point where they could take over the defense of their own country.

The prevelant strategy would be to stand off on Iran, bomb it back to the 10th century, destroy anything taller then a story tall, destroy their water works and electrical grid and force them to rebuild.

Even though I think that the American military could pound out the Iranian Military due to the fact that America could establish control of the air very quickly, the Yanks can afford and don't have the manpower to occupy both countries.

Is that at all likely though? The minute they take to bombing Iran the whole Middle East explodes. Plus, the Iranians are not the Iraqis. They have much better equipment than the Iraqis did and likely could fight back against the Americans. Based on how thin they are spread out, that could be disasterous. The Americans take their eye off the ball in Iraq for a minute and they could find themselves with an uprising and rebellion that could force their departure. The people have had it with the American occupation. I don't think it won't take much to turn enemy into ally against the occupying forces in Iraq. The Americans need to be very careful where they tread IMO.

[worth]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Thats true, however those troops are pretty tied up in the continuing occupation and pacification of Iraq. I doubt that they can spare them for a march into Iran. It would have been different if the Iraqi military and police were at a point where they could take over the defense of their own country.

The prevelant strategy would be to stand off on Iran, bomb it back to the 10th century, destroy anything taller then a story tall, destroy their water works and electrical grid and force them to rebuild.

Even though I think that the American military could pound out the Iranian Military due to the fact that America could establish control of the air very quickly, the Yanks can afford and don't have the manpower to occupy both countries.

I agree. I don't think occupation of the country is feasible. Even without Iraq I'm not so sure it's feasible.

Air superiority would be easier, but certainly no cakewalk. I'm pretty sure Iran still has a large airforce and a large number of fighter aircraft that the US might have to deal with if they were going to bomb Iran with any conventional means. I guess that's up to the war planners to decide.