Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
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.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Bush's Plans for Iran

Democracy Now!. Posted April 13, 2006.


Seymour Hersh sticks to his story: that Bush's ultimate goal is regime change in Iran.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

[Editor's Note: This is the edited transcript of an interview between Amy Goodman and Seymour Hersh. It originally aired on Democracy Now! on Wednesday, April 12. The full transcript and audio of the interview are available from Democracy Now!.]

Amy Goodman: We are joined today by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh. In the latest issue of the New Yorker, Hersh reports that the Bush administration has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack. Sources told Hersh that Air Force planning groups are drawing up lists of targets, and teams of American combat troops have been ordered into Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and to establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups.

One of the military's initial option plans calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon against suspected underground nuclear sites.

On Monday, President Bush dismissed Hersh's article.

    PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: What you're reading is wild speculation, which is -- it's kind of a, you know, happens quite frequently here in the nation's capital.

AG: Meanwhile, reporters questioned Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld Tuesday about Hersh's report.

    REPORTER: In recent weeks or months, have you asked joint staff at Central Command, possibly through General Pace, to update, refine, modify the contingencies for possible military options against Iran?

    DONALD RUMSFELD: We have, I don't know how many, various contingency plans in this department, and the last thing I'm going to do is to start telling you or anyone else in the press or the world at what point we refresh a plan or don't refresh a plan and why. It just isn't useful.

    REPORTER: Are you satisfied with the state of planning for Iran options right now?

    DONALD RUMSFELD: I am never satisfied.

AG: That was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld Tuesday. Meanwhile, Iran's moving forward on its nuclear program. On Tuesday, the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced the country had succeeded for the first time in enriching uranium on a small scale. The Iranian president insists the country's nuclear program is for peaceful means and not to build nuclear weapons. We're joined right now in Washington by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh. Welcome to Democracy Now!

Seymour Hersh: Good morning.

AG: It's good to have you with us. Well, talk about what you have found and written about in your piece, "The Iran Plans."

SH: Well, very simply, as you said in the introduction. This is not wild speculation. It's simply a fact that the planning has gone beyond the contingency stage, and it's gone into what they call the operational stage, sort of an increment higher. And it's very serious planning, of course. And it's all being directed at the wish of the President of the United States. And I can understand why they don't want to talk about it, but that's just the reality.

AG: You say that it's a pretty widespread -- or that there's a growing conviction among members of the U.S. military and the international community that President Bush's ultimate goal is regime change in Iran.

SH: There's no question that there's a lot of skepticism, particularly among our former allies -- the allies we now have, the European allies who have been with us. The United States joined late after the negotiations began, but England, France and Germany have been talking to the Iranians for years, three years now, about doing something about -- to keep them away from the nuclear edge. Our allies there are frankly skeptical about what this president really wants to do. They don't think necessarily, although there's -- it's not that the President isn't concerned about any enrichment. He's set that as a red line. He's publicly said many times that when Iran begins to enrich, that's a line we won't let them do. It's that they really think that beyond -- the whole issue is really predicated on a belief that we've got to get rid of these ruling clerics and replace it with Bush's idea, that he thinks he's still pushing very hard, which is of a democratic Middle East.

AG: Sy Hersh, you write in your piece about a military official who says that the military planning is premised on the belief that a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership. Can you talk more about what this defense official said?

SH: It's a former defense official who still does a lot of highly classified stuff, so he has access and he was given a briefing or a look at what they're planning. And, you know, it's hard to know. This is a White House that's very dominated -- this kind of planning is very dominated by the Vice President's office. In that office, you have a number of people who have been long associated with what we call the neoconservative point of view, the American Enterprise Institute point of view, which is a very hard line towards the Middle East. They've been the great pushers on this idea of democracy in that area, and it's those people who I think are pushing most effectively the President and the Vice President to believe that you can -- if you bomb and if you sustain the bombing, you will humiliate the clerics, the mullahs, who run the country.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

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:
When will these crimes be stopped?
Posted by: IanA on Apr 13, 2006 3:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let us be absolutely clear. The aim of the Bush Cheney administration and their allies in Tel Aviv is “Regime Change” and will not be satisfied until Iran and its resources are harnessed to the economic interests of the US. The legitimate development of the full fuel cycle including uranium enrichment in a nuclear energy program is Iran’s right but is being used as the vehicle to create a conflict to justify aggression.

Iran is “suspected” of having “admissions” to possess nuclear weapons. This is followed by the ridiculous scare mongering hypothesis “What if Iran gave nuclear weapons to terrorists?”

The US by pushing this line is ignoring the IAEA terms giving all signatories the right for peaceful development of nuclear energy, they ignore the NPT by not reducing their nuclear threat but developing new applications of offensive “usable” nuclear weapons. They ignore the UN charter by threatening pre-emptive aggression on sovereign states.

Iran is surrounded on two sides by countries occupied by this aggressive imperialist nuclear super state attempting to create neo liberal fiefdoms. The US has categorically refused to parley with the government of Iran. The US together with Israel openly tries to undermine that government through the cultivation and support of dissidents, combined with their use to assist in clandestine acts of aggression and terrorism, such as the attempted assassination of the president last year.

No amount of IAEA verification will satisfy these aim for regime change. Therefore it would appear as in the case of Iraq the US will inevitably escalate the conflict to lethal aggression giving no thought to the immense suffering to be caused to millions. All this so that it might not have to deal with a government of a sovereign oil exporting nation it cannot control.

When will these crimes be stopped?

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

» Agree/Disagree Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Agree/Disagree Posted by: IanA
» RE: Agree/Disagree Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Agree/Disagree Posted by: codingguy
» RE: Agree/Disagree Posted by: figuremechanic
» RE: Agree/Disagree Posted by: brunowe
Can't Wait Until November
Posted by: Tom Degan on Apr 13, 2006 3:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Regime change in Iran? Havn't we been down this road before? Look at where it got us the last time. How do you think they are planning to do that? Do you seriously believe that the US military is in any condition to start a third war in Iran? Of course it isn't. How can they possibly pull it off? Easy. Bring back the draft.

"Be the first one on your block to have your boy come home in a box".
Country Joe and the Fish

It's best not to sit around waiting for it to happen. the time to organize is NOW.

Prediction: Between election day 2006 and New Years Day 2007, they'll make the announcement. They won't call it "a draft", perse. This fucking nightmare of an administration's weird obsession with Orewllian Newspeak precludes that possibility. Theyll probably call it "Freedom Service". Clever. I can see them calling their proposed invasion of the country, "Operation: Tide Of Patriotism". OTOP! A cute little acronym designed to appeal to half-witted teenagers, "OTOP! Dude, that's sooo cool"!!

Are we going to passively sit back and allow these muderous bastards and bitches (Hi, Condi!) to use our children as cannon fodder? Every minute of every day, the mistake this country made by stupidly sending a contemptable little dirt bag by the name of George W. Bush to the White House is compounded. We've got to stand up and let them know that we will not let them sacrifice our kids for the miltary industrial complex.

Get this straight: If the republican party is allowed to retain control of both houses of congress in November, this country is finished. This president AND vice-president need to be impeached, removed from power and imprisoned for their crimes against humanity. The happiest day of my life will be the morning I pick up the New York Times and Bush's mug shot is splashed across page one. It will happen. I promise you that - it WILL happern.

Pray for peace.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

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

» RE: Can't Wait Until November Posted by: figuremechanic
» RE: Can't Wait Until November Posted by: sidewinder
» RE: Can't Wait Until November Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: Can't Wait Until November Posted by: Lincoln fan
Gas up and go!
Posted by: Bobsays on Apr 13, 2006 3:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is no surprise this attack is very real and will be very soon. Most Americans still need to wake up and realise that we are at war. The war involved all the countries of the western alliance, including lib/left favourites, Canada.

Bush and gang long ago laid out the plan as clear as daylight. I think the left inhaled the same fumes that Bill Clinton did in the 60s - what part of all this did you not see coming?

The issue isn't 'will he, or won't he?'. It is just do we think this is going to make the world a better place and us safer. That is a fair question to ask, and one I fear says 'no'.

I would also recommend going and seeing United 93. Get really mad and then think about why all of this is happening. And then ask your muslim friends what their position is in the world. Make sure they support plurality and free speech.

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

» RE: Get mad? Sure - but at whom? Posted by: figuremechanic
» RE: Gas up and go! Posted by: Crazy H
crazy & criminal
Posted by: rsaxto on Apr 13, 2006 4:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Cheney/Bush administration is crazy and criminal in just about every way that an organization can become crazy and criminal. The only way decent American citizens can bring sanity to the USA and to the world is to demand multiple impeachments at the top of this mad criminal organization.

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

» RE: crazy & criminal Posted by: figuremechanic
» RE: crazy & criminal Posted by: aussidawg
» Huh? Posted by: Prophit
We have never won the battle of the "Crusades" in the middle east.....
Posted by: Prophit on Apr 13, 2006 4:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..... and we never will. Why? I believe, its because we are a nation of self interest and small thinking, that has turned away from the principles that made us once a great nation. I just wish I knew the extent of the influence of Isreal on this whole issue. Its not their soldiers going to die for someother countries best interest.

Once you tell a whole race of people or religious group that they are going to be subject to genocide, which is what NON NEGOTIATIONS says, they will rise up to fight to the death. That is what this article is saying.

Hersh states that even the Iraqi insurgency tried to get someone to talk with them and no one would. What choice does that leave them???? What choice does that leave anyone? 73% of US soldiers on the ground in Iraq do not agree with the reasons for the war and they want to end it. Given that fact, how can these men be expected to prevail against a nation of people who are fighting to preserve their race and culture?

The commitment level is much different which will result in the more committed prevailing against our troops. We can bomb them into the stone age, but that won't change a thing unless we are willing to commit genocide. I say this. Until I see the sons and daughters (or grandchildren) of these congressmen, senators, white house officials and military leaders in the forefront of this war or the next, then we should demand no more war. 1984 is NOT AN ACCEPTABLE long term goal of any nation I am a part of.

Bush and Cheney, the brainless and heartless, both need to go and publicly be prosecuted and hung for crimes against humanity. I wait the day that happens. I will march in the streets in celebration as will the Brits when they do the same thing to Blair. I think their brains have been eaten up by those damn chemtrails. LOL

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

regime change
Posted by: Spot on Apr 13, 2006 4:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
why don't we just call it what it is? decapitation and forced occupation

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

» RE: regime change Posted by: legalr
Just the way Bushco wants it!
Posted by: rkewen on Apr 13, 2006 5:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"America is very, we're pretty much opaque on Iran."

And the opacity grew with the outing of Valerie Plame and Brewster Jennings! The last thing Bushco wants is the truth be known! To acknowledge the facts would get in the way of their insane plans for Armageddon! Too bad Bush et. al. don't realize that they would be amongst the "Left Behind." There is no place in Heaven for greedy, lying murderers and/or war criminals

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

gentlewoman
Posted by: lokicat on Apr 13, 2006 6:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
War is an exercise in mutual humiliation. Shaming and blaming are the tactics. No one wants to get into it because it's so shamful that it makes us uncomfortable to see how complicit we are in this evil.
Bush and Co. are shameless and are just doing what the US has done in countries around the world: infiltrate, destroy from within, sinister, subversive, and it rarely gets out until later, if at all. Bush Sr. was head of CIA. They are longtime saboteurs and terrorists in their own right. There are better ways to run a world....
And for all you Christians reading this, Jesus was killed by a miltaristic, fascist imperialistic power, the equivant of our leaders...alas.
Gretchen Robinson

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

» RE: gentlewoman Posted by: figuremechanic
Blessed are the Peacemakers
Posted by: zoza on Apr 13, 2006 7:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder what would happen if the world focused half as much energy on making this a peaceful planet as it does in making it a world of hatred and murder. The world is insane and I know of none out there, even the writers in these pages (who mostly focus their energies on a hatred of the right), who stand for peace.

When I heard John Kerry a few years ago (long before the 2004 campaigns began) say "We have invested mightily in war, yet meagerly in peace", I thought... ths is the guy. I never heard that from him again.

Where are the peacemakers? Is there anyone out there with the slightest bit of an altruistic spirit that is willing to stand for peace? Or is the world just consumed with this bickering, tit for tat, antagonistic mood that serves not a soul?

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

Oil and Gas grab, call it what it is.
Posted by: Jeffersonista on Apr 13, 2006 8:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How very enableing, to acquiesce and go along with these thugs desire to forceably rape and pillage another muslim country. Just another oil and gas grab.

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

It's About Oil!
Posted by: aussidawg on Apr 13, 2006 8:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The new, up and coming war with Iran has about as much to do with their plans to build a "nukular" weapon as did the Iraqi war have to do with Al Qeida and WMD's. Nope, the reason for regime change in Iran is the same as Iraq...thar's awl in them thar dunes! Guess what? It's working already, without a new shot YET being fired...anybody notice fuel prices going up just a tad lately? If Bu$h/Cheney and amigos can make this much money for their buddies running the big oil companies without YET firing off a round, just imagine the profits when they drop a coupla nukes...combine this with the up and coming hurricane season (and New Orleans STILL without levees) and what we are looking at now is small pocket change compared to later this summer and fall.

As I understand it, the administration's propaganda machine is working well as a majority of Americans now believe that Iran is a true threat. Alas, I'm afraid the damage will be done before the fall elections ever get here, which I'm not sure really makes a difference anyway what with Diebold managing our votes so efficiently. I hope with all my heart I am utterly wrong, but the pit of my stomach tells me different.

Our founding fathers, when they wrote the Constitution, provided solutions to our present problem (read the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights), however, while a viable option in their days, I don't think enough peope even care enough about their freedoms and rights presently to even take 5 minutes away from American Idol to vote for change, much less fight for it. In all reality, we the people have created this problem and we the people are the only ones that can solve it.

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

» RE: It's About Oil! Posted by: Riverside
» RE: It's About Oil! Posted by: mrsmagoo
How Deep Is The Yogurt?
Posted by: Riverside on Apr 13, 2006 8:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no doubt about it, this "once" great nation of ours is marching into deep, deep yogurt. Most importantly China and Russia are watching, and so is India, who the Bush-boys think they have bought off. We are not going to be allowed to decimate Iran and its key oil supply for much of Eurasia.

Interestingly enough, I am surprised that Israel is not running to the White House crying, "stop you are out of your mind." Yes, there is no love lost between Israel and Iran, but Israel knows that a tactical nuke attack on Iran will ignite Islam - worldwide and when that blows everyone, including Israel will feel the effects. This would not be terrorism, this would be nationalism at its worst similar in many respects to what Lawrence of Arabia achieved in a microscale with disparate Arab tribes in the Middle East. The Turks have never forgotten the licking that unity gave them.

As for Tony Blair, unless the move against Iran is like a surprise attack, any move that includes the UK will topple Blair in an instant. The UK has had it with the Iraq fantasy and they know what hitting Iran will yield. You can count on the UK swaying France and Germany and Italy and so there we are drowning in yogurt and all alone.

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

» RE: How Deep Is The Yogurt? Posted by: aussidawg
What a dangerous playground we've built.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Apr 13, 2006 9:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let me see if I have have this right: there is wacko boy as president of Iran and pajama boy as president of North Korea. On the other side we have fat boy Cheney as the real power in and around the White House, goof-boy Rumsfeld (we know that we know what we don't know we know...) as secretary of Defense, and the little cowboy/flyboy (complete with his flight-suit codpiece) as our pretend-president – and they all get to play with nuclear weapons, with the grownups stuck in the middle, self-emasculated and afraid. And as for "parental control" from rules laid down by the Founding Fathers? It seems no longer to exist. . .

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

Going On Holiday In Cambodia with Dr. Strangelove
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 13, 2006 9:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am really struck by the current parallels to the Vietnam era lies and garbage. Well before Nixon initiated his 'secret' bombing campaign in Cambodia, the CIA was actively involved in the region, partially through the Hmong tribes along the border (heroin smuggling was a big part of that era; and what about now?). These types of functions are now apparently within the Pentagon. We can be pretty sure that similar actions are currently taking place along the Iran-Iraq border.

These lunatics Seymour Hersch talks about on the "Defence Science Board" are all to reminiscent of Dr. Strangelove, aka "Edward Teller". Yes let's use our dial-a-yield nuclear weapons - what kind of raving insanity is that? Bill Schneider, Steven Hadley, Rumsfeld's Lieutenant Stephen Cambone, Robert Joseph - a collection of gibbering idiots if there ever was one.

The only bright spot is that fewer and fewer scientists are willing to work for these insane state-sponsored terrorism programs. The down side is that these people are the chief advisors to our government on military science issues - the 'death star satellite' people.

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

Have we learned NOTHING?????
Posted by: left-leaning-libertarian on Apr 13, 2006 10:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's no coincidence that this is happening in an American election year; the GOP (Greedy Ol' Pissants) have absolutely NOTHING on which to run, so they'll revert to what's worked for them in the last two election cycles. . .play on people's fears, beat loud the drums of war and spread their BS about how it's dangerous (and unpatriotic) to oppose the Bush regime and its insanity.

This is what happens when there's no real democratic opposition to demand accountability (and a semblance of sanity). The GOPers know this full well, and will do anything (let's stop underestimating their capacity for low-down sleazy dirty tricks) to keep themselves entrenched as heads of a one-party state where they are never forced to account for their outrages and obscenities.

I knew from before the beginning that invading Iraq would be the biggest mistake in American history. If Bush/Chenney/Rumsfeld/Rice get their way again and we nuke/invade/try to occupy Iran (ostensibly for "regime change") Iraq will seem like a cakewalk, a mere "second biggest mistake." It will be the final nail in the coffin of the American republic, and who will remain to lament its passing?

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

&%$#
Posted by: decembrist on Apr 13, 2006 1:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just as the reasons to invade Iraq reamain false, wrong, bogus, fabricated, spun, and cherry-picked, it appears that so are the reasons to nuke (!) Iran.

I came across what I think is an important piece today, concerning the web-release of the many, many documents of Saddam's gov't seized by US forces in the invasion of Iraq. The administration is playing its usual tricks with the release of these documents - muddying the waters.

In this Slate piece by Fritz Umbach, the author shows how documents unrelated to Iraq and Saddam have been posted, right along with documents that concern the insurgency insurgency AFTER the fall of Saddam. This while continuosly claiming that somewhere in the documents will be the evidence of some reason why we went to war.

By releasing these thousands of documents, seeded with unrelated or cherry-picked or misleading (see list from first paragraph above), the administration is trying to sow a confusion which would support the al Qaeda-Saddam ties and WMD programs claims which they rarely explicitly make themselves. And which is all totally bougus, and wouldn't work if there wasn't so many on the right who would rather make Bush retrospectively not a liar than believe their own eyes.

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

A European Perspective?
Posted by: writerman on Apr 13, 2006 1:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think we European's also have a responsibility to do something to stop the coming war with Iran. Notice I don't call it an attack, because I don't believe the conflict can be confined to just an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. If America goes ahead with this hair-brained scheme, it'll soon escalate way beyond 'an attack' and become a real war.

So how do we stop this war? First off, it is possible to stop it happening, but it won't be easy. It will require real sacrifice and real determination from a lot of people, both in Europe and the United States. We cannot rely or leave it up to the American anti-war movement to do it on their own. They will really need our help in the collosal, uphill struggle they face. How can we help them succeed? The answer is relatively simple, though it's not at all easy or without real danger. It isn't enough for us to just sit this one out and watch from the sidelines. The stakes are too high for such passivity. I think we are going to have to confront the state face to face on the streets of Europe. Given the newest 'anti-terrorist' legislation recently passed in some European countries these comments may in fact be illegal, this only shows how far we've moved away from the kind of democracy we used to know and recognise.

What is required is a massive campaign of street protests which will effectively shut our societies down. I talking here of the huge street demonstrations and strikes like we've recently witnessed in France. We have to shut down the state and effectively paralyse it for as long as it takes. If our elected politicians in Europe stand in the way they must be forced out of office by even more and longer demonstrations.
A week or maybe two of total disruption and something akin to a General Strike should be enough to topple most of the governments who refuse to actively oppose war with Iran.

We in Europe must bring the matter to a vote in the United Nations where we don't just passively watch the build-up to war, this time we must join forces and actively condemn the Bush administration and vote for, at the very least, punitive sanctions directed at the United States. We could for example decide to pursue Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice for war crimes they have already committed in Iraq and threaten to widen the scope further to incorporate any war crimes committed in Iran. Our governments could issue collectively an international arrest warrent for the entire Bush cabinet for conspiracy to commit war crimes, genocide, tortur and host of other high crimes in international law. All this is perfectly reasonable, practical and possible. How would ordinary Americans react to such a policy? It's difficult to tell. But I'm sure they would really notice it and maybe even begin to question why we were doing this. Remember, the situation is not the same as after 9/11, three years of lies and disaster in Iraq has definitively undermined the power and credibility of the Bush administration. It's actually weak and crumbling and concerted and clear opposition from Europe, Russia, China and the rest of the world will have a real effect this time around. We probably couldn't have stopped the Iraq war, but we can stop the Iran war, if we really want too and don't back down but go forward.

These are only some of the things we could do to make it absolutely crystal clear to ordinary Americans what we think of their government and the crimes the Bush administration is planning. We have to agressively draw a line in the sand and say thus far and no further! Clearly such a strategy would require a great deal of co-ordination with the coming American anti-war movement to be effective. The United Kingdom has a vital role to play in such a European movement. Tony Blair must be forced from office as soon as possible and preferably by people power on massive and sustained scale.

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

» RE: A European Perspective? Posted by: aussidawg
There's only one solution
Posted by: alkrauss on Apr 13, 2006 1:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whining and going on about how stupid, or dense, or dangerous this president is, may be futile spinning of wheels. Who has the capability of taking this administration out, immediately? Legal process may be too late to forestall the momentum here. I'm talking decapitation of the U.S. government, by whatever means available to the people who can carry it off. They have to be Americans, of course, and placed right near the points of access. This is an emergency for the entire world, and our citizenry bear full on responsbility for undoing the effects of their abominable self governance record. I certainly hope the capable or right persons are reading this.

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

» RE: There's only one solution Posted by: Lincoln fan
Everything Going to Plan
Posted by: shinseiji on Apr 13, 2006 2:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That's the only thing one can conclude from Hersh's ending quote from Bush at Johns Hopkins University.

Clearly, these guys are not one bit fazed by the "thousand tactical errors" made along their bloody way. That can only mean that, by and large, most of these were not errors at all, but intended results. Unlike most of the Left, I think what the US has in store for Iran is a continuation of what they did and continue to do to Iraq: the eventual destruction of the country by means of a longer-tem "perpetual war".

Why else would Bush and the rest insist on using precisely thes adjectives, "long" and "perpetual"? Because they, together with the Democratic Party leadership, know exactly what they are up to. So here is the plan for Iran:

1) First, switch sides in Iraq from Shia to Sunni in preparation for the attack on Iran. This is already underway as should be clear to anyone who reads the news;

2) Launch the air campaign everybody now knows about against Iran, probably timed for the US elections (and why not? Bush/Cheney has demonstrated to the world that a maximum of 60% of the American electorate are complete impeciles at least part of the time, with a minimum of 30% imbeciles all of the time, and who cares, Abe, if you can't fool all of them all of time? That's not how real politics has ever worked, just ask A. Hitler).

3) Wait hopefully and eagerly for the inevitable "bring 'em on" backlash (why did you think Bush said that? Because he was stupid? No, and you are stupid to even think that after so many "mistakes") from the Iranian-aligned forces - Hezbollah, the Iragi Shia, etc., and whack 'em. Here you will see the supposedly "bogged down" US ground forces in Iraq spring into action againt the Iraqi Shia leadership, which will be decapitated, with the remainder pushed back into exile in Iran where they came from. The US forces in Iraq will need to be deployed out of their bases anyway, where they would be easy targets for Iranian missle retaliation. The two leading theocracies, Israel and Saudi Arabia (one 'democratic', the other 'royal') will be pleased;

4) Just keep the bombing of Iran going, but now as part of a defacto Anglo-American bombing-sanctions regime, just like the one enforced mostly by Clinton for almost 10 years that was so effective in drastically weakening Iraq, making it easy pickings for the final coup de grace administered in 2003. This will be the "long, perpetual" part. True, Iran is a bigger country, but that just means a bigger effort will be justified on the part of the Anglo-Americans. The sanctions will be "enforced" by simply blowing up anything provided by Russia, China or anybody that is "judged" to be in "violation of the sanctions". What are they going to do about it? Nothing. Just like Serbia.

5) In 2008, hand this situation off to the next President who, regardless of whether they are Republican or Democrat, will enforce the bombing/sanctions regime against Iran "in perpetuaty", that is to say, for however long it takes to soften Iran up for the eventual coup de grace. And it doesn't matter how "unpopular" this all becomes because there will be no organized opposition to it within the USA since, as Kerry/Bush proved, the American Left will always support the guy who will continue to impose these policies.

So there you have the escalating sequence: Serbia/Kosovo (so obviously a pilot run)->Iraq->Iran->(China?, or maybe something bigger than Iran but still smaller than China, in between?) Now there is no doubt lots of things could go wrong along they way, and I'm sure they will. In fact, I am certain that ultimately and inevitabley America will fail in its Perpetual War for the same reason the Nazis did, for this is very much a Nazi-style dynamic. This is simply the terminal phase of US imperialism.

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

Who knows how to assemble a protest?
Posted by: didjeri_voodoo on Apr 13, 2006 2:21 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would like to assemble a protest. This one far different than any protest so far. I would like to protest participation in the U.S. I'm interested in forming a sit-in to last indefinitely. I'm only intersted in recruiting those who are willing to fast as long as possible to show the people of the U.S.---the true population---that if we aren't represented, we are basically dead in the eyes of our pseudo-representatives. If our morally-flawed, insane administration nukes Iran, I will not participate in this scoeity again, and will die of hunger. Once again, does anyone know how I could stage a starvation/fast protest? Thanks.

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

» RE: How to assemble a protest is easy: Posted by: doinaheckuvajob
» RE: To know how to fast in protest, Posted by: doinaheckuvajob
Flash, Just in George Bush is the AntiChrist
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Apr 13, 2006 6:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Considering all the predictions that the Third World War will begin in the Middle East, Old George sure is in there kicking the tires and lighting the fires of death and destruction. The three horsemen of the apocalypse, George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Rumsfield. That's right folks step right up for a front row seat to the rapture. And we have to wait till November for fast, fast relief from these angels of death!

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

Such a pity . . .
Posted by: BsAs light on Apr 13, 2006 6:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I like your Moxie kid but I think a protest like the kind you are contemplating is a day late and a dollar short. The protests we recently witnessed in favor of a general amnesty for illegal immigrants was to be expected and tolerated because it will ultimately serve BIG business and earn some serious votes for the team most willing to pander to Hispanic voters. Protesting the war in Iraq or the forthcoming bombardment of Iran will be treated differently altogether. Of all the recent sensational news items, from plans to bomb Iran to impending civil war in Iraq, the most disturbing piece of news was barely publicized by the Indie media let alone the MSM.

A Halliburton subsidiary called KBR was recently granted a (big surprise) no bid contract worth nearly 400 million to build internment camps throughout the US. That so few people are aware of this sinister development is reason enough to question the future of democracy in the USA. I take every available opportunity to inform friends, family and fellow posters about this frightening abuse of federal authority but it never seems to have any perceptible impact on the vast majority of people who should otherwise be outraged to learn of this Orwellian apparatus. These internment camps are like bright neon signs saying “vacancy dissenters”. What possible reason could we have for building internment camps on our own soil? Whether they are intended to hold illegal immigrants, war protesters or rabble rousers, the outcome will be the same – our civil liberties will have been suspended a la Guantanomo Bay and whoever is held in those camps can expect to be held without access to legal counsel, although that won’t mean much in the coming months anyway.

There was a distinct sequence of events that should have tipped Americans off to the true intentions of this administration long ago, but as we generally whittle away the hours watching American Idol or Special News Reports concerning the love life of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, none of it got through. It was like a child’s whisper drowned out by so much static. You know what they say – give them bread and circuses . . .

The first stage of the “Century for the New American Nightmare” actually began during the Clinton administration when they entered into a campaign to vilify Bin-Laden, even before the terrorist attacks on American embassies in Africa, and well before he took the rap for 9/11. The US government got busy building the perfect beast soon after they realized he had outlived his usefulness as proxy Soviet warrior and could serve the US much more effectively in the capacity of militant Islamic terrorist – the new Red Menace if you will. Every war needs a culprit, a gullible citizenry and an easily manipulated media willing to sow the seeds of fear and impending doom. Bin-Laden fit that description to a T and Crap News Network and Faux News disseminated the message with incredible fervour.

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

CONT
Posted by: BsAs light on Apr 13, 2006 6:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The second phase of what I call “The Great 10 Year Program” to end democracy and participatory government in all its incarnations was the “attack” on America on 9/11. Any thinking human being can see this for what it was so I won’t elaborate on the patently ridiculous notion that a man on dialysis, living in a cave in Pakistan orchestrated the most complex and comprehensive attack on the US ever. Americans bought it hook, line and sinker however. Any attempts to question the official version only drew the ire of “true patriots” who labelled you a traitor for even suggesting that steel should not melt at such low temperatures. I can distinctly recall the insults I endured when I suggested that “those towers sure fell squarely in their own footprint as if it were a controlled demolition” and “why are they shipping off crime scene evidence like the steel girders?” We simply set by and let it happen, blinded by our rage for the “murderous heathens” who would perpetrate such a cowardly act. Yes indeed – who would be capable of such a cowardly act? The nation was incensed as Bush stood atop that pile of rubble that his own agents created and declared his intent to get the people “who knocked down these towers”.

Third phase: Afghanistan is subdued with lightening quickness and a puppet is installed. I think by now most Americans are aware of the geo-strategic importance of Afghanistan where the construction of a pipeline from oil rich former Soviet Republics to port cities in Pakistan is concerned. Even if this pipeline is not completed it is worth noting that Afghanistan has proven natural gas reserves to the tune of 5 trillion cubic feet. Afghanistan is possibly more useful as a site for strategic military bases besides being significant in terms of oil and gas reserves.

Fourth Phase: Bush’s resident Uncle Tom, and perhaps the only cabinet member with a shred of credibility, lies to the UN in convincing fashion convincing the American public that Saddam Hussein poses a serious threat to US national security in the process. Iraq is attacked but not subdued, much to the chagrin of Buscho employees who rather anticipated a ticker tape welcome parade. Apparently history taught us nothing. Bush prepares the country for an epic war that will last for centuries, or at least until ’08 at which time he will either pass the buck, or for my money, fabricate a pretext for a state of emergency and declare martial law. At this point we are all screwed – remember those KBR camps? They are going to be paramount in the minds of millions of dissenters who know find themselves en route to Idaho Federal Reprogramming Camp in Buttfuck, Idaho in military transports. That other little delicate issue we debated while Rome burned – illegal wire-tapping – is now being used to imprison dissenters as well. Boy too bad we never dealt with that one either. You will be sure to regret it when some black-ops thug is reading one of your Alternet.org posts back to you under a heat lamp. I digress. Iraq will be subdued at all costs and we will co-opt its vast petro-wealth.

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

CONT2
Posted by: BsAs light on Apr 13, 2006 6:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fifth Phase: This phase as well as details of phase 4 are still in the workings but you can expect something like this: Iran is carpet bombed day and night until so many civilians have been killed that they are essentially defenseless. US soldiers who have thus far been “bogged down” will become their former killing selves and steamroll Iran like a 150-ton CAT. Any and all resistance will be shot on sight and the US will occupy Iran or install a brutal dictator to run it according to US dictates. So in summation, the US will occupy or at the very least have an extremely friendly puppet leader installed in Iran, Iraq (outright occupation) alongside friendly Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. Syria and Jordan will sit down for anything at this point and any resistance in Pakistan will be brutally put down by Musharaff. The US will be the master of nearly 2/3 of the world’s proven oil reserves. Soon thereafter Bushco will precipitate the downfall of the $$$ and all fiat currencies will fall right along with it. Peak oil is here and the US will be the only country with oil enough to barter and fuel a military capable of further conquest. This administration is on a petro-scavenger hunt and they won’t stop until they have it all for themselves. Funny this all could have been prevented if Americans could only have pulled their heads out of their asses for long enough to survey the lay of the land but Brad and Jen was the overriding concern I guess. It’s too late and no hunger strike or march on the Mall is going to prevent what is coming. Halliburton, the Carlyle Group, Blackwater Security and all the rest have us by the short and curlies. Oh how very far we have fallen . . .

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

» UK already there Posted by: Bobsays
Name one good thing Bush has done for this country.
Posted by: mom'z the word on Apr 13, 2006 11:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am hard pressed to think of one redeming quality that will keep Mr. Bush out of the history books as the worst president in American history. His legacy will be distinct. His name will be associated with a reign of terror administered on citizens of the US and people of the world. We lost more during Bush's reign than any other time in our history. Our reputation as a democracy is at its lowest point since our beginning. Mr. Bush was able to bring the richest, most powerful, most respected and admired nation in the world to a point of utter distrust, disgust and distain. We are feared nearly everywhere because we can't be trusted. We could have voted Bush out. We didn't. We could get rid of some very corrupting and bad influences in Congress. We don't. Perhaps we are own worst enemy because we are allowing this to happen. Still I can not think of one good thing the history books are going to say about George W Bush.

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

Bottom-up strategies...?
Posted by: axolotl_helix on Apr 14, 2006 12:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've read the recent statistic from Zogby that 85% of the U.S. troops in Iraq believe the main reason they are there is to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks, and 77% think it was also to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.

At first, I was shocked and depressed. But then I saw how this could be a good thing- an excellent opportunity.
I think it may be the key to ending the "long war" and even to regime change in the homeland...

We need to find a way to inform those 85% of the real reasons they are in Iraq. Maybe even the reasons for 9-11, and the reasons for Saddam, and the reasons for al Qaeda- but that's getting too far ahead. The fact is that those 85% are flat wrong. They're fighting for a lie. There are many reasons why we're in Iraq, none quite as simple as the Bush administration's moralistic fairy tales for retarded children, but they are still easily understood and make much more sense.

How to make it happen? I don't know, but someone was able to get to them to ask their opinion, so someone could get to them to tell them the truth. And the truth IS on our side.

This is more important than marching in protest, more important than voting for the lesser of two evils. I think trying to change the beliefs of the "American public" is a waste of time- we're a willfully ignorant bunch. But the ones out there dodging snipers and car bombs have a very good reason to care, and they really should know better.
As soon as they do, that's it. Game over.

If Bush has no soldiers, he will have no war.
And the power to buy a trillion dollars worth of the best guns in the world won't help him if the people holding those guns decide to turn around and point them at his head.

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

» RE: Bottom-up strategies...? Posted by: mom'z the word
» RE: Bottom-up strategies...? Posted by: axolotl_helix
» RE: Bottom-up strategies...? Posted by: coalbanks
this is NEWS ??!!
Posted by: coalbanks on Apr 15, 2006 7:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So how is the plan for regime change in Iran news? Obvious is more the word. No oil-bearing territory will be allowed to exist outside the control of the big oil-consumer, whether that is the USA or China, yes, I predict the day will come when China uses it's clout to control oil just as the USA does today. Face it, the big consumers of oil must have control of, not just access to, oil-producing territories (nations? says who?) for thier economic well-being. So oil-producing territories that are not securely under the control of the big consumer can expect regime change to bring & keep them in the shadow of whichever is the stronger big consumer. The EU? Hmm? Could be interesting times ahead.

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

JOSHUADUDD - INTERNET WHORE
Posted by: cerveny1 on Apr 16, 2006 3:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Funny thing about Alternet.org . . . There is this little click of self-righteous moderators who unilaterally determine what is right and wrong. Those in particular who don't agree with one JOSHUA LUDD and his brand of democracy may find themselves banished to Alternet's Gulag. I don't mind anymore. I have determined that a site frequented by an arrogant, gutless little prick like JOSHUA LUDD is hardly worth my time. I managed to break all of Alternet's fascist and seemingly self-contradictory rules of engagement but then again so did Joshua so I can only conclude that he is some kind of moderator or just a little bitch. Probably both. I'm sure that many of you who have debated with this self-important little prick understand. Having a left-leaning site like this is great and all but when assholes like JOSHUA LUDD run the show it ends up being a My Way or the Highway circle jerk eh JOSH? There can be no dissenting voice with JOSHUA LUDD. He silences you if he disagrees with you – sound familiar? All this discussion about the problems Americans are facing, censorship being one of them, and Fascistnet.org ends up being a microcosm of that very problem.

I challenge Joshua on every occasion because I disagree with him and his beliefs. He and I have both exchanged ad-hominem attacks – he seems to be a real tough guy though, given to Lee Marvin-esque outbursts but yet he whines to a friend and poof I’m gone or maybe he is the BIG PRICK who moderates the whole thing. In any event he actually represents much of what is wrong with this site and to a greater extent, what is wrong with America. We are discussing such topics as War, Racism, Fascism, Sexism, Capitalism, Socialism, etc. and yet are asked to keep the kid gloves on. Funny, one would think that people with enough conviction to come in here and discuss these topics would have thicker skin, and apparently most do except that little BITCH ASS TRICK JOSHUA LUDD. Keep him in mind when he attacks you personally and calls you a “reprehensible, murderous hypocrite” or this little pearl he threw out there – “Good for you. You still didn't serve. As my grandfather... a WW2 vet would say "close only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes". Either you served or you didn't, and you, you chickenhawk piece of shit, DID NOT.” Funny Josh is beyond reproach much like our own president and the man he was criticizing in that thread – Colin Powell. Who is going to censure or ban you Josh? What about that post wasn’t a personal attack and profane?

I think many of you would be interested in knowing that Little Joshie is running a pseudo-intellectual pyramid blogging scam – fucking hilarious Josh!!!! What is it called Josh – Blogging for Bucks?? LMAO!!!
No I understand why you have this incestuous little relationship with Alternet.org. You are giving each other the reach-around eh JOSHUADUDD? You’re nothing but a little blog twink are you? This is the real progressive thinker you all are dealing with. WHAT A FUCKING LOSER!! Here’s his pitch spoken like a good little Neo-con:

“Write a blog. Make Money.
There are millions of people who want to work from home but don't know how.There are millions of people who know how to write.There are millions of people who know how to write, but don't know how to make money with it.We KNOW how to make money with content people write. This site was designed to allow YOU to write content which WE will market and we will ALL make money.We'll make the money for you!
Then, we split the money,
50/50. Not only that but we'll also place your ads on the blogs of people you refer to writingUp.”
CHECK IT OUT HERE – PIMP YOURSELF OUT!!
http://www.writingup.com/write_a_blog_make_money

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

The Last of the War-Presidents!!
Posted by: Natasha on Apr 17, 2006 3:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bad news is we are stuck with him for another term, but the good news is - thanks to American constitution - come 2009, we would never have to, ever again, watch the asinine smirk, listen to ignorant pronouncements, or tolerate blatant show of unashamed arrogance.
The 51% that voted him back might miss their moral master and his religious theatrics, but the other half of civilized Americans would have to carry the burden of shame for a few decades and several generations - just as the Germans had over Hitler’s misadventures. As military supremacy, by itself, proved inadequate to conquer unfamiliar lands with no-less patriotic masses - it is clear that even the hi-tech might of the US could only be employed as a shield, but never as a sword. Failure to see this reality is what transformed the adamant Super Power to a big fat Super-Boob.

Should Americans, tired of superstars, get lucky to locate a half-decent chap to occupy the Whitehouse, and display the strength of common will for common purpose - they may succeed in bringing in a sensible ruler who might have a shot at closing the great new divide, and unifying all Americans, both factions warring as fiercely as Sunnis and Shiites. However, restoring some degree of trust outside will prove much harder a task than selling the natives more rhetoric and new hopes. Even Americans can’t afford to ignore world opinion forever and risk bungling their future because of a few ill-placed bets. With glaring ineptitude in managing their own show, there is little evidence to suggest American competence to solve others’ problems, no matter how pressing their strategic interests are. If anything, last five decades of poor policies arising out of poorer understanding of global priorities and diverse cultures exposed chinks in the armour, and in the process created a larger number of less-stable, strife-torn regions in despair.

With five billion people on the planet - the 80% outside America that begs to disagree with Bush, including the 1.3 billion aggrieved Muslims that despise anything American - it could well be several Presidents before any real damage control could be accomplished. The real teaser is in the magical outcome of Bush-style delivery of democracies. Hitler had banked on his belief that the victor would never be questioned on his reasons for going to war and that any cockamamie excuse would do, as long as victory was assured. Since this new-age warrior appears to be banking on similar thesis - bleak prospects of normalcy in Iraq, run by Iraqis, must raise a few eyebrows, even in the red states of Archie Bunker’s good old US of A.

Even as the embers of Iraqi war victims burn bright, buoyed by his own assessment of success in blessing Iraqis with democracy, the Prez is busy openly plotting his invasion of other points on his ludicrous axis. With Cairo fully bought off and the push he gets from faint signs of new awakening in Tel Aviv, Syria may be an easy prey. Iran would remain his nightmare, but North Korea could well be his Waterloo.

No one is betting on any earth shattering moves in the second term and he may well fill the time with more rhetoric and fade into oblivion as most Presidents do. But, since the other half of America is anxious to see him fall on his face, it is conceivable that the Republican controlled Congress would wake up one morning, smell the stench of unbridled autocracy in the Oval office and impeach this one dangerously insensitive American - albeit to walk tall on their next campaign trial. No one can avert another Tsunami, but Bushinanigans Americans can.

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

Iran surely has nukes
Posted by: ng1944 on Apr 17, 2006 9:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No doubt Iran has nuclear wepons
and means of delivery of them to US and Israel.
This is the only way to explain their defiance
and stubbornes.
And probably Israel and US suspect it,
or we would see military strike long time ago.

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