Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
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

America Is Already Committing Acts of War Against Iran

By Scott Ritter, Truthdig. Posted July 30, 2008.


Our taxpayer dollars are funding activities that result in Iranians being killed and wounded and Iranian property destroyed -- acts of war.
Advertisement

The war between the United States and Iran is on. American taxpayer dollars are being used, with the permission of Congress, to fund activities that result in Iranians being killed and wounded, and Iranian property destroyed. This wanton violation of a nation's sovereignty would not be tolerated if the tables were turned and Americans were being subjected to Iranian-funded covert actions that took the lives of Americans, on American soil, and destroyed American property and livelihood. Many Americans remain unaware of what is transpiring abroad in their name.

Many of those who are cognizant of these activities are supportive of them, an outgrowth of misguided sentiment which holds Iran accountable for a list of grievances used by the U.S. government to justify the ongoing global war on terror. Iran, we are told, is not just a nation pursuing nuclear weapons, but is the largest state sponsor of terror in the world today.

Much of the information behind this is being promulgated by Israel, which has a vested interest in seeing Iran neutralized as a potential threat. But Israel is joined by another source, even more puzzling in terms of its broad-based acceptance in the world of American journalism: the Mujahadeen-e Khalk, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group sworn to overthrow the theocracy in Tehran. The CIA today provides material support to the actions of the MEK inside Iran. The recent spate of explosions in Iran, including a particularly devastating "accident" involving a military convoy transporting ammunition in downtown Tehran, appears to be linked to an MEK operation; its agents working inside munitions manufacturing plants deliberately are committing acts of sabotage which lead to such explosions. If CIA money and planning support are behind these actions, the agency's backing constitutes nothing less than an act of war on the part of the United States against Iran.

The MEK traces its roots back to the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeg. Formed among students and intellectuals, the MEK emerged in the 1960s as a serious threat to the reign of Reza Shah Pahlevi. Facing brutal repression from the Shah's secret police, the SAVAK, the MEK became expert at blending into Iranian society, forming a cellular organizational structure which made it virtually impossible to eradicate. The MEK membership also became adept at gaining access to positions of sensitivity and authority. When the Shah was overthrown in 1978, the MEK played a major role and for a while worked hand in glove with the Islamic Revolution in crafting a post-Shah Iran. In 1979 the MEK had a central role in orchestrating the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, and holding 55 Americans hostage for 444 days.

However, relations between the MEK and the Islamic regime in Tehran soured, and after the MEK staged a bloody coup attempt in 1981, all ties were severed and the two sides engaged in a violent civil war. Revolutionary Guard members who were active at that time have acknowledged how difficult it was to fight the MEK. In the end, massive acts of arbitrary arrest, torture and executions were required to break the back of mainstream MEK activity in Iran, although even the Revolutionary Guard today admits the MEK remains active and is virtually impossible to completely eradicate.

It is this stubborn ability to survive and operate inside Iran, at a time when no other intelligence service can establish and maintain a meaningful agent network there, which makes the MEK such an asset to nations such as the United States and Israel. The MEK is able to provide some useful intelligence; however, its overall value as an intelligence resource is negatively impacted by the fact that it is the sole source of human intelligence in Iran. As such, the group has taken to exaggerating and fabricating reports to serve its own political agenda. In this way, there is little to differentiate the MEK from another Middle Eastern expatriate opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress, or INC, which infamously supplied inaccurate intelligence to the United States and other governments and helped influence the U.S. decision to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein. Today, the MEK sees itself in a similar role, providing sole-sourced intelligence to the United States and Israel in an effort to facilitate American military operations against Iran and, eventually, to overthrow the Islamic regime in Tehran.

The current situation concerning the MEK would be laughable if it were not for the violent reality of that organization's activities. Upon its arrival in Iraq in 1986, the group was placed under the control of Saddam Hussein's Mukhabarat, or intelligence service. The MEK was a heavily militarized organization and in 1988 participated in division-size military operations against Iran. The organization represents no state and can be found on the U.S. State Department's list of terrorist organizations, yet since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the MEK has been under the protection of the U.S. military. Its fighters are even given "protected status" under the Geneva Conventions. The MEK says its members in Iraq are refugees, not terrorists. And yet one would be hard-pressed to find why the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees should confer refugee status on an active paramilitary organization that uses "refugee camps" inside Iraq as its bases.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iran, acts of war

Scott Ritter is a former U.N. weapons inspector and Marine intelligence officer who has written extensively about Iran.

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:
Many major factual errors about MEK(1)!
Posted by: F-Abdolian on Jul 30, 2008 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many major factual errors about MEK!
Posted by: F-Abdolian on Jul 30, 2008 5:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As much as I respect Mr. Ritter, This article is full of many assumption and factual errors about the MEK.

First of all, I have to say that as a teenager, I was romanticizing this organization (like millions of other young teenagers during the revolution time in Iran). I spent a lot of time with their members both inside and outside Iran so I know their history first hand.

MEK as it is today is a cult, not a political movement, their pseudo-religious mentality, combined with their romantic view of a socialist Islam, makes them similar to groups like Khmer Rouge who blindly followed their leaders to purify their country.

What is wrong with the article
The MEK traces its roots back to the CIA-orchestrated overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeg.

This is true, MEK members, and their spiritual leaders Ayatollah Taleqani were all members of Iranian National Front, after the second 'emerge' of the organization in the 60s, which in reality was nothing but a infiltrated Savak action to catch the remaining activist of the group, they decided to start a military fight against the regime. They sent some of their members to Lebanon, Syria and Libya to learn guerrilla techniques and to bring back some weapons with them.
Formed among students and intellectuals, the MEK emerged in the 1960s as a serious threat to the reign of Reza Shah Pahlevi.
This is absolutely not true.
Mujahedin' Khalq, were never a popular organization among the people in Iran, despite the outcry of the Shah to make them dangerous, the organization never had more than a few hundred members (at it's peak).
they managed to perform some military actions including the assassination of some American military advisers to Shah's regime but they never became a 'danger' to the regime.

Facing brutal repression from the Shah's secret police, the SAVAK, the MEK became expert at blending into Iranian society, forming a cellular organizational structure which made it virtually impossible to eradicate.

Again, this is not true, MKO (or MEK as Mr. Ritter refers to them) was literally destroyed in 1352-53 (1973-74) when almost all leading members of the organization were captured or killed by the Savak and the remaining members converted to Comunism and started a new organization called Peikar, something that later caused a bloody internal fight between the members of the group and took them completely out of the Iranian politics until a few months before the revolution.

The MEK membership also became adept at gaining access to positions of sensitivity and authority.
Again, I am afraid Mr. Ritter is ill-informed about this organization, I have never heard of such "sucess" story about MKO.

When the Shah was overthrown in 1978, the MEK played a major role and for a while worked hand in glove with the Islamic Revolution in crafting a post-Shah Iran.

Iran revolution happened in 1979, February 12 to be exact. MKO did play a role in supporting Khomeini and to topple the regime, but I would not call that a major role. They believe they were a major role and make stories about their majestic role in the revolution, but it is not very true.

(followed in the next section)

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

What difference does it make
Posted by: symcokid on Jul 30, 2008 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if we tantalize and provoke a war? This is the USofA and we can do whatever we want, at least up to this point we have. We have never been wrong yet about anything yet but the other countries have been. So with this blatant arrogance it just makes me more certain that this United States does not really want Peace -anywhere, rather just the opposite, total disruption.

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

» RE: What difference does it make Posted by: the man with a dog
Dockside
Posted by: rtmyth on Jul 30, 2008 8:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Israel wants us to destroy Iran. It shall be done, and soon or Israel will use its' nuclear weapons .

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

» RE: Dockside Posted by: Mr. Terrific
» RE: Dockside Posted by: Lauren
angryspittle
Posted by: Vinnie on Jul 30, 2008 9:04 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why aren't the Iranians screaming bloody murder over these violations publicizing them like crazy, offering international observers into Iran to document them, catching some perpetrators etc.??

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

» RE: angryspittle Posted by: zipoka
» RE: angryspittle Posted by: Lauren
» RE: angryspittle Posted by: MerrynS
The enemy of my enemy.........
Posted by: carbon-based on Jul 30, 2008 9:25 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets see, the far left supports Iran who funds and support Hezbollah who indiscriminately bombs Israel, who's hard core religious regime suppresses any rights, media etc in the country,

The far left supports Chavez, who suppresses any demonstrations and has banned all media not supporting him and the government. It seems the far left also supports Cuba.. so is the far left agenda pro dictatorship, suppression of freedoms and state control of all media or just pro anything anti America?

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

» If its sneaky, snotty, selfish, Posted by: weathered
» Maybe you forgot about . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» Embrace Iran Posted by: edith
» RE: mbrace Iran Posted by: Lauren
» Embrace Iran Posted by: edith
» Amen sister ! Also question. Posted by: jwverez
» RE: mbrace Iran Posted by: carbon-based
» Anti-imperialism Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Anti-imperialism Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Anti-imperialism Posted by: donl51
This government is one big war crime
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Jul 30, 2008 10:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look at Mt. Rushmore. What do you see? A nice carving? Something patriotic? How about desicration!!! Look a little closer and you'll see it's a monument to genocidal maniacs. Every face up there had an extermination policy against Indians. Entered every Treaty(land sales agreement) with the intent of never abiding by it and hung medals of Honor upon the cowards that massacred Elder,Women and Children on the frozen grounds at Wounded Knee.
Face the truth...this government,controlled by big business,make gobs of money off of wars,importing hard drugs and creating hardships for nations we,the wealthy, don't like. Are we screwing with Iran? YES!!!! Did they used to be our Friends? YES!!! We screwed them over by putting the Sha of Iran in power,just like we did with Saddam. Oh let's not forget all we've done in South America. We set up and took out the government in Peru,Columbia,Cuba,Hondorus and Panama. In the 60's we trained Isreali pilots on the east coast and Egyptian pilots on the west coast. Most of the world's dictators,and their henchmen, are grads of the School of the Americas,that's where we teach folks the fine art of torture,Yes Sally WE TORTURE!!!!
Let's end this shit once and for all.
Elect Jeffrey7 for Prez '08
www.myspace.com/jeffrey1776

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

Wars do not solve anything
Posted by: maxsmart on Jul 30, 2008 10:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, just watch the cascade of headline stories about things so serious something needs to be done and soon you begin to feel the media is selling an agenda AGAIN!

I think it was a Mother Jones article about the Russian nuclear expert we encouraged to sell nuclear weapons plans to Iran in Vienna that fits in here. He was extremely reluctant to do this but was encouraged to sell flawed plans.
Were we trying to set them up with a nuclear program for us to oppose? There is also the side effect that they might suspect some such a thing and look for the flaw, adjust for the flaw, and there you have it.

Add to all this that the nuclear balance in the region was not affected by Iran but Israel getting the bomb. Then add in the fact that lots of countries have nuclear power and most likely if the time comes, they know just what to do. Iran has just as much right as them to be in such a strategic position.

Finally since it is the US that proclaims the unilateral right to attack anyone, it is us that is forcing countries to believe they may need a nuclear capability just to maintain their right to exist. If Iran were to have a bomb they would join the same club that is unable to use them. I suppose you think they are suicidal but it's not likely.

One thing is clear, though, if we persist in trying to solve problems by warfare, weaponizing space etc we as a race will not last much longer and our planet may be radically reshaped for all other life as well.

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

Nixon to China; Obama and/or Mac to Iran
Posted by: edith on Jul 30, 2008 10:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are NO inherent strategic differences between the US, even as a major military power, and Iran. The entire dispute is the result of the US' inability to apologize for what the Iranians see as imperialism during the Cold War era when we supported the Shah and overthrew an elected govt in the 50's perceived as proSoviet. Indeed, despite the sanctions, since the oil market is international and oil is fungible. we for all practical purposes are importing Iranian oil, or the Iranians are selling oil to say Spain or South Africa that they otherwise might ship directly to US refineries. Iran would be a fine market for our software, drug industry and medical technology, as well as oil equipment. Islam and capitalism are not incompatible. The greatest merchants of the Middle Ages were Muslims throughout the Central/West Asia region, including Persia(Iran).

The nonsense our politicos spout about terrorism by Iran is essentially the stubborness of the US to take sides in the Israel/Palestine dispute, and to declare anyone who supports armed Palestinians terrorists while the US supports armed Israeli settlers and the Israel Defense Force that backs up the occupation and blocks the resettlement or compensation of Palestinian refugees.

Obama (or McCain) should shove the zionists and conventional wisdom to the winds, go to Iran after the election, and reestablish diplomatic ties with a mutual nonaggression pact. Oil prices would plummet, the stock market would soar. The ayatollahs might actually remove the clown who has the "President" title there if a major economic and diplomatic agreement went down, especially since the Kurrent Klown in the White House would be gone.

Israel would go boo hoo. If they committed aggression against Iran, just revoke the taxexempt status of all the feeder zionist groups that pump US dollars into the artificial Israeli economy. The dual citizen hitech billionaires and their kept and corrupt IDFgenerals who really run Israel will get the idea. Perhaps they will simply emigrate out of Israel at that point. Some of them will probably become consultants to Iran!

Two problems, Iran and Palestine, solved. Do it Barak! Do it Mac!


What are the zionists going to do? Run Lieberman as a third party candidate in '12?
Not contribute to Democrats? I doubt it. That would hurt the liberal image zionists love to cultivate to show that they are a different kind of captialist.

Zionist financiers, real estate operators, hitech and media moguls will always follow where the Power flows. (If they see the Israel scam is over,once and for all, they'll move on.
There are other schemes,no doubt, like making money in the carbon trading scams sure to flourish under the paternalistic paradise the climate change "community" will bestow upon us ignorant gas guzzlers after Obama or Mac bring us the enlightened policies of carbon caps.)


This Iran "crisis" is a dispute without any rational reason in the American interest! If China and Israel,neither friends of the US can have nukes, why not the Iranians? This will also resolve the alleged dispute between the US and Iran about Iraq, which is an absurd dispute since the current Malaki regime in Iraq is pro-Iran anyway. This will grease the way OUT of Iraq for the US. If the Sunnis don't like it, let THEM fight Iran and the shiites.

It's not our fight! Richard Nixon, except for the much overblown "Watergate" incident that shocked NO ONE who had followed Nixon for years, was in fact one of our most effective Presidents. I didn't say he was nice, and nice is not a necessary attribute for a good or great leader. He opened the way to China and removed a potential WWIII adversary. That his successors have been suckered in trade deals by the Chinese simply shows the domination by Wall St of both parties.

Embrace Iran.

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

Republican's Surprise -- Iran's Dirty Capacity is NOW
Posted by: alaskagrrl on Jul 30, 2008 11:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is beyond suspicious to me that one extreme point never, ever gets mentioned in the buildup to War with Iran...

They can build a dirty bomb NOW

Is this the Republican October (November, December) Surprise ?

Imagine a small bomb incorporating ANY radiological agent, even a simple truckload of Smoke Detectors. Imagine news coverage as this radioactive cloud passes (even harmlessly) over some portion of America. Imagine Pundits claiming the radio-nucleotide signature was from an Iranian Facility.

How would we know any different ? How reminiscent to the Anthrax Scare sent to Congressional Opposition ? Anthrax from our own labs....

Bloggers please, PLEASE awaken to this potential TSUNAMI of support this would give the NeoCon agenda. September 11 would be an appetizer compared to the feast of Blood and Money our Republican Leadership would unleash.

A mildly radioactive cloud spreading anywhere across America would suspend the Election and allow the worlds greatest Fascist Regime to rise and secure power -- permanently.

Anybody but me notice that Pakistan's Suspension of Election seemed like a 'dry run' of our own ? Remember Musharraff (OUR GUY) suspended his own elections after (OUR GAL) Condy Rice gave Benezir Bhutto over to her killers with friendly personal encouragement.

Stop them now by exposing the GREAT POTENTIAL SUCCESS of such a plan.

Our only hope is to remove the Sting of Surprise.

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

Something is happening here, what it is, is just not clear
Posted by: solrev on Jul 30, 2008 12:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have never been able to figure out why the masters have this obsession with Iran. I never underestimate my enemies, so I can see why they feel the need for permanent bases in Iraq. What do they want in Iran? The nuke propaganda or regime change is just that propaganda. Iran could not threaten its way out of a wet paper bag. Rumors of war to create the mind set that we need McCain on that wall, I do not think so. This Iran obsession has been there from day one. Iran has always been part of the master plan, what is the plan? The only thing I can guess is that it is still the good old cold war. They have to keep the Russians out and contain them in Syria.

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

Iran, Cuba, and request for info.
Posted by: chorton on Jul 30, 2008 1:31 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The CIA's involvement with destabilizing governments, supporting terrorism and irregular warfare and organizing coups to overthrow them did not begin with Iran. At its founding after World War II, the CIA (under the leadership of Prescott Bush, George Jr.'s grandfather) took over Hitler's spy network in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, in the process taking over operations of this type that were already under way. Some of these they continued to run. However most observers mark the beginning of the modern era of the CIA by the overthrow of the governments of Iran and Guatemala, followed soon after by the campaign to overthrow the revolutionary government of Cuba.

It is ironic that now, 54 years after the overthrow of Mossadeq and 47 years after the Bay of Pigs invasion, both Iran and Cuba remain stuck in the Empire's craw! The Empire is trying again to overthrow the government of Iran using irregular warfare, but is teetering on the brink of a decision to use their main military forces. We should be asking if they are making similar plans for Cuba.

I have recently heard what I regard as fairly reliable reports that the US military is engaged in a major program of constructing housing for 100,000 people at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba. This, I was led to understand, is to support a "humanitarian intervention" that would begin on the day of Fidel Castro's death, and to deal with a "humanitarian crisis". I have searched the Web but have found no corroborating evidence. Does anyone have any solid evidence that this is or is not taking place?

The Guantanamo Bay base is 45 square miles, which is not tiny, but much of it is water or flats, and easily observable from the base's main building clusters. The hilly part, where something like this might be hidden, is also where most of the existing roads and structures are located. If you know anyone who is or was recently stationed at Guantanamo, and if a construction project on this scale is under way, they would very likely have seen evidence of it. If they've seen nothing, that would actually be pretty good evidence that this is not in fact taking place. (BTW I was given to understand that this information is not legally a secret.)

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

Germany or USA?
Posted by: pinkfloydd on Jul 30, 2008 2:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I cannot believe how similar the two police states, US and 1930's Germany, are beginning to appear and act. Not only have we upped the ante on removing illegals, but we also have a propaganda machine that would make Goebbels salivate. We advance our policies on the unsuspecting and suspecting alike. Then we lie to our citizens about war mongering. We offer two limbs from the same tree as the choices concerning who governs us. And we annihilate the personal freedoms the citizens have come to take for granted anyway.

When we finally attack Iran and insist it was actually them who facilitated it, then the transition will be complete.

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

» RE: Germany or USA? Posted by: richholland
sooo, what then
Posted by: jstepp590 on Jul 30, 2008 3:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The question I have is, what do we do when we wake up in a shooting war with them?

Considering the illegality of such a war I know my reaction would be negative to say the least. Considering the lack of desire on the part of the citizens of this country to support such a move it may weaken our irrational support for illegal military violence against our neighbors enough to do the following, if we have the guts.

Impeach, arrest for treason, prosecute and execute. If we follow the law this is the process and penalty we would be seeking.

Someone help me here. Would treason be applicable towards collusion with corporations or only foreign governments? Considering the laws protecting heads of corporations, would it be possible to try them individually for treason for affecting actions within our government (hijacking it) that resulted in the deaths of people to deliberately create conditions which benefit their corporation and profits? I really am hazy on this, any help?

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

Iranian assistance is needed to bring stability to Afghanistan
Posted by: Garvagh on Jul 30, 2008 8:04 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In his interview earlier this week with NBC, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that the presence of te American representative to the nuclear talks in Geneva was a step in the right direction. For Iran, a singular issue is the display of a proper level of respect.

I think Iranian assistance with the effort to stabilize Afghanistan would be available, in a context of an abandonment entirely of the ill-considered and basically fatuous notion of "regime change" in Tehran. The far more pressing threat, in the nuclear arena, would arise in the event of a major upheaval in Pakistan.

The effort of Israeli militarists and religious fanatics to hold onto much of the West Bank, and even the Golan Heights, by obtaining an unquestioning American military umbrella, is an extremely unwise strategy. Iran seeks minimum justice for the Palestinians, defined ultimately by the Palestinians themselves. For the US to aid and abet a terror campaign in Iran is beyond hopelessly stupid, particularly when it is but an extension of the dangerous Israeli effort to keep large portions of the West Bank even if this means the prevention of the creation of a viable independent Palestine.

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

A Fear of This Presidency Realized
Posted by: Godfather89 on Jul 31, 2008 6:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The war on Terror is fought secretly as with as overtly. But to actually be in an official state of war against Iran without public knowledge of this happening is scary, a fear has been realized, we are in a country and no one seems to know it.

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

McCain, Isreal and Iran
Posted by: lawton on Jul 31, 2008 12:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush, Cheney and McCain have only a few months left to start or provoke a war with Iran. I believe the Israelis will come to the neocon's rescue before November by becoming their surrogate attack dog.

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

'Mericans cant reed
Posted by: ccEd on Jul 31, 2008 7:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you Colonel Ritter,

Unfortunately the people in most need of this information either don't read, or can't read... This is why they watch Fox News (It's pretty.)

Article IV of the Nuclear nonProliferation Treaty CLEARLY spells out the inalienable right (of Iran) to enrich uranium.

NPT Treaty

I have taken this 5 page treaty to my Senators offices (in Nevada both Senators represent all constituents) only to get letters back spouting support for Israel.. I even highlighted the Article for their ease.. I recon Senators can't fricken read either.

I am ashamed of my fellow countrymen that they cannot take the time out from NASCAR or football to read this simple document that is at the core of the most important issue we could ever face (war.)

Of course Americans didn't bother reading in the lead up to the war with Iraq either, so I am not surprised -- just disappointed -- that we as a once great nation seem to be either too lazy or stupid to learn from our own mistakes.

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

Nothing Has Changed With Iran
Posted by: samsel3 on Aug 4, 2008 7:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nothing has changed with Iran. The administrations interest in Iran & nukes is a smoke screen for their real agenda. Their true interests are Cheney's energy policy. Part of that policy are the Caspian Sea pipelines which will deliver Oil & Natural gas through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan,Pakistan, to the gulf of Oman. The products will be sold to markets in Asia. Trillions of dollars will be made by BIG OIL.
These pipelines will be cheaper to construct if they can go through Iran, but regime change is necessary first.

The Caspian sea area holds one third of the world's oil & Natural gas . Southern asia is their target market.

This pipeline was also the reason for the Afghanistan invasion. Cheney's energy policy is the root of all these middle east wars,and a federal court judge sealed all documents associated with it for the administration to hide their agenda.

More troops are needed in Afghanistan to protect the contractors building the pipeline.

Iran stands in the way of total control of global gas & oil markets. Iran signed a new oil deal with China's Sinopec Oil, on Dec.10,2007.

Months ago China said there would be dire consequences if the US interfered with there direct oil contracts with Iran. Both parties in the Congress should be very concerned with China's growing war machine and need for oil. They are the real threat & the administration doesn't care they are in control ! All that matters to them is BIG OIL and their corporate stock portfolios .

Russia has multiple nuclear power plant contracts with Iran. These plants are currently under construction.

Reuters uk reported on January 18, 2008 : " Iran has some awesome colleagues. Russia and China have become guardians of the Iranian economy. They don’t put religion between business and political advantages. The US is sorely lacking in intelligent Foreign Policy. Hitler’s Foreign Policy has been resurrected to serve the needs of an oil agenda and turn the US into the most disrespected and despised world power ".


Moscow -- Armed forces will be used if necessary, including preventively and with the use of nuclear weapons, for protection of Russia and its allies, the Russian Armed Forces' Chief of the General Staff Yuri Baluyevsky said on Saturday.

"We do not intend to attack anybody. But all our partners must realize that for protection of Russia and its allies if necessary armed forces will be used, including preventively, including with the use of nuclear weapons," Baluyevsky was quoted by the Itar-Tass news agency as saying.

Baluyevsky reportedly made the statement at a scientific conference of the Academy of Military Sciences January 19, 2008.

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