Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

News Giving Me the Jitters About an Attack on Iran

Posted by Siun , Firedoglake at 5:24 AM on July 14, 2008.


Will the neocons' insanity continue?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get War on Iraq in your
mailbox!

 

While poking around Iraqi news I ran across an odd little piece in the Arab Times reporting that Israel was denying reports that Israeli fighter jets were using US bases in Iraq to practice for an attack on Iran. My perennial worry about an attack on Iran kicked in - and was not eased by the report in the Sunday Times of London that Bush has "amber lighted" an Israeli attack on Iran:

President George W Bush has told the Israeli government that he may be prepared to approve a future military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities if negotiations with Tehran break down, according to a senior Pentagon official.

and that Israel may well want to act before a potential Obama presidency:

Senator Barack Obama's previous opposition to the war in Iraq, and his apparent doubts about the urgency of the Iranian threat, have intensified pressure on the Israeli hawks to act before November's US presidential election. "If I were an Israeli I wouldn't wait," the Pentagon official added.

The Israeli news site Ynet makes that last bit even more worrying in their video account which includes a mention of Obama's plan to visit Israel this summer and notes that:

In the event a military strike takes place during his visit the Democratic candidate would be forced to make a stand regarding the issue possibly jeopardizing his position as America's next president.

Is that called a "win-win" by the Bush/Olmert crew?

Back to the original report that set me digging about - it all apparently came from Nahrrainnet and Badger translates as follows (in the comments to this post):

People around two US airbases (Assad in Anbar, and Ali bin Abi Talib in Nassiriya) had been noticing unusual nighttime takeoffs and landings of fighter planes, along with unusually tight security for several weeks, and anonymous Iraqi Defence Dept people had concluded it was American or Israeli (more the latter since the Anbar flights seemed to be coming from Jordan), and they pointed out that from the Nassiriya base you could in in Iranian airspace in 5 minutes and to Bushehr very quickly.

The Jerusalem Post article mentioned in the Arab Times reports a official denial of the story but it is less than categorical and AFP ran with the following less than reassuring denials:

Defence Ministry spokesman Major General Mohammed al-Askari dismissed the report on Friday.

"We have no information about Israeli jets using Iraqi airspace for rehearsals," he told AFP.

In Jerusalem, meanwhile, an Israeli military spokesman told AFP he was aware of the report and said, "I have no information on this."

The US military did not comment on the report.

So add this all to the jitters file ...

Add as well some very interesting questions over at Pat Lang's place (and Lang continues to be a must-read especially on Iran)

I am not an expert in the field of missile technology, but the missiles in the faked photograph appear to be anti-aircraft ground to air missiles or artillery rockets. The slanted attitude of launch speaks to that. No? Anti-aircraft missiles would be a threat to aircraft, not to Israeli cities. Artillery rockets are a battlefield weapon.

If those missiles are not ballistic missiles, then several interesting questions arise:

1- Which governments are fooling around here?

2- If these are not ballistic missiles, why are the MSM propagating the implication that this photograph displays missiles that are a threat to Israel?

I'm swearing off caffeine until this all settles ...

Digg!

Tagged as: israel, insanity, iran

Siun is a regular blogger for FireDogLake.


Bush's White House Spying on Iraqi Prime Minister
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino wants to make it clear, the White House IS NOT denying spying on Maliki.
Post by Amanda. September 5, 2008.
U.S. Troops Kill Six Iraqi Security Forces
The military says it was a case of "mistaken fire."
Post by Staff. September 4, 2008.
Abu Ghraib's Torture Museum = Pure Propaganda
The Iraqi government's plan to reopen Abu Ghraib, including a museum of crimes committed under Saddam is revisionist history.
Post by Fatih Abdulsalam. September 4, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Try The Iranian News...
Posted by: Turiye on Jul 14, 2008 5:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcast and News. The site is simple to find, try Persian not Iranian if you can't find it. No One there is making anything of any of this in Iran, the Persians are not excitable to threats, suppose living in that manner for so long you tend to ignore the Talking Heads.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More Torture and Terrorism by The Ziocons!
Posted by: williameon on Jul 14, 2008 5:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Made for Ameri-coned consumption.
Keep the prices high so we can afford that
Pie in the sky!
The Corpirate Mafia
Put a Nuclear tipped Cruse missile to the Worlds head and
Extort
6 Trillion Dollars!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Read Seymour Hersh's 'Preparing The Battlefield'...
Posted by: gazooks on Jul 14, 2008 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
here: http://www.newyorker.com/ reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_hersh

(note: correct space after .com/ )

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Each side expects the other to back down
Posted by: ColinLaney on Jul 14, 2008 1:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Iran doesn't continue enriching uranium, it will have backed down. If Iran does continue enriching uranium, and the US and Israel don’t bomb, then the US and Israel will have backed down.

The national leaderships of Iran, Israel, and the US are divided into factions, some more belligerent that others. Within each of these national leaderships, the more warlike faction accuses the less warlike faction of favoring a humiliating and disastrous national backdown.

This isn’t a situtation in which we can count on all players making rational decisions. Remember August 1914.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]