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.

War on Iraq

Our Most Important Mission: Prevent War with Iran

By Scott Ritter, Truthdig. Posted October 5, 2007.


The countdown to war with Iran is both real and terrifying. And it won’t be stopped so long as Iraq is in the spotlight.
Advertisement

The long-awaited “progress report” of Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker on the status of the occupation of Iraq has been made, providing Americans, via the compliant media, with the spectacle of loyal Bush yes men offering faith-based analysis in lieu of fact-based assessment. 

In the days and weeks that have since passed, two things have become clear: Neither Congress nor the American people (including the antiwar movement) have a plan or the gumption to confront President Bush in anything more than cosmetic fashion over the war in Iraq, and while those charged with oversight mill about looking to score cheap political points and/or save face, the administration continues its march toward conflict with Iran unimpeded.

Bush responded to the Petraeus report by indicating that he would be inclined to start reducing the level of U.S. forces in Iraq sometime soon (maybe December, maybe the spring of 2008).  But the bottom line is that the troop levels in Iraq keep expanding, as does the infrastructure of perpetual occupation.  The Democrats in Congress are focused on winning the White House in 2008, not stopping a failed war, and as such they not only refuse to decisively confront the president on Iraq, they are trying to out-posture him over who would be the tougher opponent of an expansionist Iran.

Here’s the danger: While the antiwar movement focuses its limited resources on trying to leverage real congressional opposition to the war in Iraq, which simply will not happen before the 2008 election, the Bush administration and its Democratic opponents will outflank the antiwar movement on the issue of Iran, pushing forward an aggressive agenda in the face of light or nonexistent opposition.

Of the two problems (the reality of Iraq, the potential of Iran), Iran is by far the more important.  The war in Iraq isn’t going to expand tenfold overnight.  By simply doing nothing, the Democrats can rest assured that Bush’s bad policy will simply keep failing.  War with Iran, on the other hand, can still be prevented.  We are talking about the potential for conflict at this time, not the reality of war.  But time is not on the side of peace.

Three story lines unfolded earlier this month which underscore just how easily manipulated the American people, via the media, are when it comes to the issues of Iran and weapons of mass destruction.  In the first, Rear Adm. Mark Fox, a spokesperson for the U.S. military in Iraq, let it be known that U.S. forces had captured a “known operative” of the “Ramazan Corps,” the ostensible branch of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard command responsible for all Iranian operations inside Iraq.  This “operative,” one Mahmudi Farhadi, was, according to Fox, the “linchpin” behind the smuggling of “sophisticated weapons” into Iraq by the Quds Force.

We’ve heard this story before.  In January of this year a similar raid by U.S. forces in Irbil netted six Iranians, five of whom are still in U.S. custody.  Senior American officials let it be known that these Iranians were likewise members of the Quds Force, and included that organization’s operations director.  All were tied to the (unspecified) transfer of arms and munitions into Iraq from Iran.  The Iranian government claimed, and the Iraqi government confirmed, that the detained Iranians were all attached to a trade mission in Irbil, where they oversaw legitimate commerce between Iran and Iraq along the Kurdish frontier.

The United States continues to hold the Iranians prisoner, undoubtedly subjecting them to “special treatment” in order to elicit some sort of confession, if our handling of other Iranian diplomats previously captured in Iraq is any guide.  Their release any time soon is unlikely, given the impact a de facto admission that the Bush administration got it wrong would have on the overall case against Iran it is trying to build.  The fate of Farhadi is likewise up in the air. 

None other than Kurdish President Jalal Talabani, a staunch pro-American, condemned the detention of Farhadi by U.S. military forces, noting that the Iranian was a well-known businessman who was in Iraq as part of an official trade delegation.  The Iranians have threatened to close down cross-border trade in Talabani’s sector of Iraqi Kurdistan, shutting down a key income stream for the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, the Iraqi Kurdish faction Talabani heads.  Such is the reality of modern Iraq. 

But this reality is nowhere to be found in the White House.  The president himself has led the charge, as recently as this past August, when in a speech to the American Legion’s national convention in Reno, Nev., Bush threw down the gauntlet against Iran, declaring, “I have authorized our military commanders in Iraq to confront Tehran’s murderous activities ... the Iranian regime must halt these actions.”


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq war, iran

A former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served under Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Scott Ritter worked as a chief inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq from 1991 until 1998, helping lead the effort to disarm Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. He is the author of several books, including “Iraq Confidential” (2005, Nation Books), “Target Iran” (2006, Nation Books) and “Waging Peace” (2007, Nation Books). “Target Iran,” with a new afterword by the author, has just been released in paperback by Nation Books.

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


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:
People are people everywhere
Posted by: vox persona on Oct 5, 2007 12:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suspect that the Iranian people are as big of victims of their bad government as we are victims of ours. We faced down USSR the evil empire with thousands of nukes aimed at us, but we 9our boy emperor) jumped at the chance to bring war to Mesopotamia; to a country we had well sewn up? Now we hear the same steady drumbeats of war from the same crowd, this time aimed at Iran? Are they insane? Bu$hCo wants to embroil us for the rest of this century into an imperial aggressive hegemonic war of choice, for all the reasons so well outlined by the fine readers here at Alternet. Our Iraq fiasco will seem like our Grenada excursion compared to attacking Iran. If God is Love, and Christ taught peace, then voluntary war is antiChrist-ian. No amount of self-rationalization by Bush can justify all the blood on his hands already. I guess he figures, 'in for a pint, in for a million gallons of blood.....so kill them all and let God sort'em out'.
Unless things have changed since yesterday's paper, the dollar has fallen below the Canadian dollar. You remember the Canadian dollar, the butt of all those jokes by the late night comedians. If we attack Iran, or if oil becomes tied to the Euro, or if China calls on our debt, or if the world flushes their bucks in a panic, our dollar will dip below the peso. If only the shrub can hold off the dam breaking until after the next inauguration, he can hand this whole ugly mess to someone else, then of course Bush can blame them. The only thing still keeping the dollar afloat is that the whole world is affected by our ponzie scheme smoke and mirror dog and pony show. Euros look like a pretty good investment right about now.

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

» That makes more sense.... Posted by: justaguy
How to stop Bush attacking Iran
Posted by: dobermanmacleod on Oct 5, 2007 3:30 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only way we can stop Bush from ordering a prevenative attack on Iran is to convince people that Iran's likely retaliation will be to destroy Saudi oil facilities.

Recently, the Pentagon gamed Iranian retaliation after a US preventative attack, and they came to the conclusion that the US economy could be shielded from harm.

Using the unconventional attack strategy of Iran destroying Saudi oil production, Iran accomplishes many objectives, but more importantly, it could be the only thing that would deter Bush.

Iran would punish both an ally of the US and a regional rival. Iranian oil facilities and product would become much more valuable. The attack on Saudi Arabia could even be blamed on a diabolical US plot, defusing blame on Iran.

While Iran would find it difficult to stop traffic through the Persian gulf, destroying Saud oil facilities would be much easier, with missile fire, terrorist cells, or even small boats. That equipment would burn and blow up easy, and it would take a really long time to replace.

International oil prices would soar, with no market substitute for Saudi oil production. If the US destroyed Iranian oil production, that would subtract even more. The US economy would for sure go into recession, and the world economy might go into depression. Worse, the US couldn't depend upon foreign borrowing, and with the large costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the conflict with Iran couldn't be practically pursued due to the US budget.

People: there is something you can do to prevent Bush from ordering a preventative attack on Iran:

Spread the rumor that Iran will destroy Saud oil facilities in retaliation, and that would destroy the US economy.

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

Has anyone seen Bin Laden
Posted by: rocketman on Oct 5, 2007 4:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really have little regard for Ritter - his "about face" re WMD issues etc... but that aside, he is correct..attacking Iran is insanity.

We do need to hope that congress comes to it's senses and finds a different way of dealing with Iranian supplies of weapons into Iraq..another war isn't the answer when we should be ending this one!

We should be dealing with Al Qeada instead of creating another enemy. Why Bush isnt single minded on this issue is beyond imagination!

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

» RE: Has anyone seen Bin Laden Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Has anyone seen Bin Laden Posted by: rocketman
What happens after the attack on Iran?
Posted by: akai ringo on Oct 5, 2007 4:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In all the many postings on Iran, including this one, I have seen little or no reference to what the U.S. Administration has in mind for Iran after the bombing attack, assuming this takes place. One of the major criticisms made of the Iraq war was the almost total absence of planning for what would happen afterwards. Of course, things may well turn out differently from what the Administration plans, but It would be interesting to know what they have in mind. They can presumably get rid of Ahamdinejad easily enough, but since he is not the real source of power, that is not going to make much difference. And if Bush plans to get rid of the Supreme Leader Khameini, he could be storing up a heap of trouble. It is surely fairly certain that an air stike will have to be followed up by a land invasion. Are there plans to use Iraq as a base fronm which to launch this? What scenarios does the Pentagon have in mind? Does anyone out there know? And if the answer is that there aren't any, then God help us all.

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

Establish Diplomatic Relation With Iran
Posted by: Michka on Oct 5, 2007 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Scott is absolutely right. Focus on bringing the troops home is not going anywhere.

The only suggestion that I have is that rather than framing it as "prevent war" which did not succede in the case of Iraq, we need to frame this in a positive and energizing way.

Demand congress for establishing diplomatic relation and peace with Iran.

Scott's point is critical. And as much as I was opposed to waging war with Iraq, there is no practical way to just pack and come home right away.

War with Iran is essential for the administration as it gives it all the reasons it needs to stay in Iraq longer. So if you want to bring the troops home put all your energy and focus on

Bring back diplomatic relation and dialogue with Iran NOW

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

» RE: Establish Diplomatic Relations With Iran? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
After attack!
Posted by: farhada on Oct 5, 2007 5:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
>I have seen little or no reference to what the U.S. Administration
>has in mind for Iran after the bombing attack, assuming this takes place
Do you really think they have any plans for the future?

these are the people who were TOLD Osama was determent to attack US, and they did nothing.

These are the people who were told attacking Iraq will open the gates of hell and they didn't listen.

These are the people who did nothing to help the victims of the Tsunami for days.

These are the people who did nothing to help Katrina.

These are the people who only care for their own and their short sighted stupidity.

They don't care if the hell brakes loose, who will die in those wars? Not their children.
Who will loose money in that war? Not them, because they have everything safe in defense company stocks and OIL.

It is up to the ordinary people to realize that Iran is not their enemy, it is the vast majority of the US political establishment that is acting as guardians of Israel rather than representing their own country.

As long as the majority of Americans don't understand this, you are doomed to see your boys come home in buddy bags and your economy sinking even lower every day.

/Farhad
http://www.abdolian.com/thoughts

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

» RE: Buddy bags? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Buddy bags? Posted by: Habaro
» RE: Buddy bags? Posted by: farhada
Watch out for how we may get it
Posted by: Michka on Oct 5, 2007 5:14 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We think that because we have the strongest military in the world that we are also the brightest people. We are not.

Iranians invented the chess and that is what they are playing with you.

We may be able to destroy significant civilian and industrial infrastructure in Iran.

This is the real goal of Bush administration. By destroying civilian and industrial infrastructure the US intends to accomplish two goals:

a) Create significant suffering and dissatisfaction in Iran to the point that it leads to regime change, and
b) Protect Israel by bringing significant setback to Iran’s economic and military capability.

What we do not appreciate is the in fact Iran’s regime is also itching for a military campaign by the US. Not because it is an opportunity to fight US, but because

a) It helps the regime solidify its non-democratic grip on Iran
b) Gain international condemnation of the US

In fact Iran may elect to take no military response at all. In the same way that they have restrained from responding to US kidnapping of Iranian citizens in Iraq. Just picture the UNSC the day after bombing campaign on Iran; there has been no damage to shipping lines, there has been no increase in US fatalities in Iraq, there has been no other violent reaction by Iran anywhere. How does that make US look in the face of the world?

If you think this is nonsense go back and watch Ahmadinejad’s presence at Columbia. This man calmly sat and listened to pretty rough insults and did not blink an eye. President Bush would have probably left in tears. That’s another form of “martyrdom”. So simply because we bomb and kill 50,000 IGRC and couple of hundred thousand civilians it may only reinforce Iranians self of victim hood and then use that to get the US out of Iraq with the help of an avalanche of international condemnation.

Again, it is very important for your readers to understand that

a) We are no more intelligent than those who are managing Iran’s strategic thinking
b) You know near to nothing about a culture and people who have been dominant in the middle east for over 2500 years

I am no smarter than the rest of you folks, but I lived in the region for almost 18 years and speak fluent Farsi and Arabic and in many ways find Iranians far more sophisticated in strategic thinking than our own boys.

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

» Is Iran actually a regime? Posted by: american
Iran's real threat is economic, not nuclear
Posted by: pgj1949 on Oct 5, 2007 5:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Bush administration's claims that Iran's nuclear program is a real and present threat do not stand the test of reason. Even if they wanted a bomb, they are years away from being able to produce one.
There is, however, a way in which Iran does pose a very real and current 'threat' against the United States. Iran, the world's second largest oil producer, now sells 85% of its oil in currencies OTHER than the US dollar. This directly threatens the status of the dollar as the world's premier reserve currency.
Where once upon a time the dollar was given worth by being backed in gold, in more recent times its legitimacy has been backed by its use as the currency in which oil is traded.
As the dollar has fallen in value relative to other major currencies, the value of producers' dollar-denominated oil also falls. This leads the price of oil to rise in dollars, and creates an incentive for producers to exchange oil for a currency that is rising (instead of falling) in value relative to the dollar.
Since one of the main attractions of dollars as a reserve currency was its use in purchasing oil, trading oil in euros or yen diminishes the desirability of the dollar in international trade and capital markets.
Iran's gradual abandonment of the dollar in favor of other currencies lays down a course that Saudi Arabia and other oil states are sure to follow in the pursuit of their own self-interest.
As that happens, the economic hegemony of the United States will become severely threatened. We will no longer be easily able to export either our national or personal debt without greatly increasing the rate of interest that we offer. This will increase the cost of government and maintaining a personal high-consuming life style, and reduce our ability to afford the war machine that has been necessary to enable Western corporations to exploit the natural resources and markets of most of the rest of the world.
Even were we to force Iran to reestabish their dollar-based oil market, the economic fundamentals that led to abandoning the dollar would remain. War with Iran would accelerate our national indebtedness and further weaken the dollar. Even if we maintain our ware machine, we cannot invade every oil producing state. The fundamental threat to the dollar is not Iran, but our and transnational corporations' greed.

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

Thank you, Scott. Extraordinary and Noble. My thoughts: an axiom for action.
Posted by: american on Oct 5, 2007 7:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The political situation inside America is completely contrived; there is a minority in this country of Zionist "Jews" and evangelical "Christians" who sanction and push forward these oh-so-wicked moves by the Bush Junta. The people who control the power media (I consider the "mainstream media" a misnomer because it is propaganda and therefore not authentically derived; it doesn't come from the bottom up, as in reporting, but from the top down) and who are in the congress and the highest positions of most institutions in this country nearly all belong to this same society. I have heard it called "polite society." If there was ever a more bizarrely ironical term, I cannot think of it. The unconstitutional war powers act was engendered by the oh-so-true juggernaut here and now that the media essentially equals the presidency equals the congress equals the supreme court equals the large corporations but definitely does not equal the people.

The most vexing, galling, intractable hypocrisy and evil wickedness that I will never ascertain is encapsulated in your lines: "Israel has drawn a red line across the calendar, indicating that if Iran has not pulled back from its nuclear ambitions by the end of 2007, military action in early spring 2008 will be inevitable." The inconceivable horror of the utter loss of what greatness that ever was America becoming conceivable, we must examine, may be most certainly pivoting around the shameless, unabashed group of persons currently running Israel and those in power in America who support it.

In the end--and I offer no apologies--I count the survival of America to be greater than that of Israel, not least among the reasons of which is that it's founding ideals are greater and far more universal.

All this complexity in lying and hypocrisy by the evil and wicked persons gripping power in the US and Israel is hard to get one's mind around as this article aptly demonstrates. Treachery and deceit spring from their every action like some deadly and virulent virus. That is why the prince of peace gave these simple words to evaluate the motivations of the wicked: "judge them by their fruits."

Eliminate any doubt of this from your minds my fiends, these fruits are deadly. Retain this surety and remain bold in taking on any individual or group you deal with who is knowingly or unknowingly carrying this virus, because more than life itself is at stake--the meaning of life is at stake.

The good news: the vast majority of the people in the world are on your side. That this is happening, know, is only happening due to deception. Thieves come in the night when people are asleep. Is this not how they who are in power have acted?

Who is going to save America? Who is going to save millions of lives? Who is going to save the world? (If it hasn't dawned on you yet, that is exactly what these people are trying to do, using your country.) Do you fathom the profound significance of what is going on right now? Are the waves of the message reverberating in your ears?

Then the call is meant for you--

Who is going to do something about this? You are.

Do well or do greatly, but do something.

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

If we enter into a war with Iran...
Posted by: Farmertim on Oct 5, 2007 7:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We will within weeks face a expanded war with Russia and China who have significant interests in Iran.
India may come to help against China , but all china would have to do to avoid conflict with India is close its ports to Western trade and we are in a economic spiral of tragic proportions.
France, Germany, and the rest of the EU who depend on fuel from Russia would quietly sit on their hands and most of the Middle east who use to support us could take the same stance and possibly withhold shipments of crude our way.
Or Iran could block the gulf to most shipping of crude or anything else by sinking a few of our Carriers with cruise missles from the Russians that curently avoid our detection.
So...the nuclear option our administration thinks exsists seems to be the least of our worries for we have no infrastructure to replace that lost in an expanded war, the recources to build it if we could and no crude other than Iraq to fuel a reduced military and its heavy equipment.
Enter South America who have been warming to the middle east countries could withhold our food and in short we are screwed if we take this war any farther than we have, which isn't working in the first place.
Like the old saying goes..there once was a farmer who hauled watermelons to town but didn't make any money selling them...so he got a bigger truck.....
Its time we reailzed as a country our time in the sun has left us blind to the needs and responsibilities to our neighbors...and playing bully in the playground will come to a quick and painful end, if we do not change our ways!
Farmer Tim

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

From the man himself
Posted by: christastropher on Oct 5, 2007 7:49 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here are some quotes from the Petraeus Report that show that Bush Co. are dead set on war with Iran:


Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq
General David H. Petraeus
Commander, Multi-National Force-Iraq
10-11 September 2007


“We have also disrupted Shia militia extremists, capturing the head and numerous other leaders of the Iranian-supported Special Groups, along with a senior Lebanese Hezbollah operative supporting Iran’s activities in Iraq.”

“Foreign and home-grown terrorists, insurgents, militia extremists, and criminals all push the ethno-sectarian competition toward violence. Malign actions by Syria and, especially, by Iran fuel that violence.”

“… our forces and our Iraqi counterparts have focused on improving security, especially in Baghdad and the areas around it, wresting sanctuaries from Al Qaeda control, and disrupting the efforts of the Iranian-supported militia extremists.”

“In the past six months we have also targeted Shia militia extremists, capturing a number of senior leaders and fighters, as well as the deputy commander of Lebanese Hezbollah Department 2800, the organization created to support the training, arming, funding, and, in some cases, direction of the militia extremists by the Iranian Republican Guard Corps’ Qods Force. These elements have assassinated and kidnapped Iraqi governmental leaders, killed and wounded our soldiers with advanced explosive devices provided by Iran, and indiscriminately rocketed civilians in the International Zone and elsewhere. It is increasingly apparent to both Coalition and Iraqi leaders that Iran, through the use of the Qods Force, seeks to turn the Iraqi Special Groups into a Hezbollah-like force to serve its interests and fight a proxy war against the Iraqi state and coalition forces in Iraq.”

“…success against Al Qaeda-Iraq and Iranian-supported militia extremists requires conventional forces as well as special operations forces…”

“none of us earlier this year appreciated the extent of Iranian involvement in Iraq, something about which we and Iraq’s leaders all now have greater concern.”

“…the findings of a 16 August Defense Intelligence Agency report on the implications of a rapid withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. Summarizing it in an unclassified fashion, it concludes that a rapid withdrawal would result in the further release of the strong centrifugal forces in Iraq and produce a number of dangerous results, including a high risk of disintegration of the Iraqi Security Forces; rapid deterioration of local security initiatives; Al Qaeda-Iraq regaining lost ground and freedom of maneuver; a marked increase in violence and further ethno-sectarian displacement and refugee flows; alliances of convenience by Iraqi groups with internal and external forces to gain advantages over their rivals; and exacerbation of already challenging regional dynamics, especially with respect to Iran.”

It's nice the way that the administration are trying to blame Iran for their failed invasion, that makes war just that much easier.

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

Ritter speaks
Posted by: motamanx on Oct 5, 2007 8:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ritter is talking to us. Are we listening? Are we writing and phoning our congress people?

And if we are, are we doing it in enough numbers to put a stop to this administration's warmongering?

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

Iraq the pre-game show..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Oct 5, 2007 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I absolutely agree..


Iraq as bad as it is, is only the pre-game show compared to the ruin this ill-conceived attack on Iran will beget..!

Armageddon..that's all..

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

Repeal the War Powers Act?
Posted by: willymack on Oct 5, 2007 8:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Repeal away. Our dear leader has elevated himself to El Supremo, answerable to NOBODY. He'll just go right ahead with whatever his handlers tell him to do, and to hell with congress, the American people, and the whole friggen world. We had a chance to stop this crazy bastard in 2000, and again in 2004, but nooooo! We did nothing, and just look at where we are now.

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

You hit the nail in the head
Posted by: Michka on Oct 5, 2007 8:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I tried for well over a year to meet with my Democratic congressman from the state of Maryland, on this threat. I called, I wrote letters, I stopped by ... and I am still trying.

The problem is that our congress has sold out to the highest bidder. That doesn't mean we should not speak up, but it may take a lot more than just calling these people

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

Lying and Trumping Up Grounds for War with Iran
Posted by: sofla100 on Oct 5, 2007 9:26 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Look, this is all a big set-up with trying to claim Iran is supplying weapons to groups in Iraq. Why? First of all, the Iranians support Maliki, they are not worried about him at all as being any kind of threat. In fact, he is a probable ally. Now, the last thing the Iranians want is a pretext for war with the USA, yet Bush is bound to find one. The USA in fact did Iran a big favor in getting rid of Saddam. They have no problem with even the USA keeping troops for now in Iraq and see it as providing some stability.

Just like the WMD's with Iraq, Bush is looking to invade Iran under some trumped up pretext. in the meantime, Bush won't talk to Iran, he is also not going to let any inspectors in either as that would show Iran's nuclear program is non-existent (as for making nukes). Why war with Iran? First of all, it solidifies the right-wing of the Repub. party, next the USA is worried Iran will price her oil in Euros wrecking the American dollar even further. The Israeli's are also bucking for it and the attack may even start from their own territory (to temporarily hide USA complicity) with USA made bombs and planes (the kind the Israelis always use). Lastly, from the right wing perspective, these "non Christians and non Jews" need to be "taught a lesson." What better way then stealing their oil from them?

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

» War with Iran Posted by: openhouse
» RE: War with Iran Posted by: sofla100
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
The time for discussion is over.
Posted by: Rathan47 on Oct 5, 2007 10:18 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now is a time for action. A time for the brave men and women who are the fabric, the backbone of America to stand up and reclaim the land that is yours. No matter what your race, your language, your sex, or your economic status, stand up! You matter! Your opinion matters! Your family matters! Your life matters!

The time has come to stop living in a country that you no longer recognize. Stand up and with the power of your voice cry out your indignation at how the few have distorted the will of the many!

Stand up and fight for the men and women who are dying overseas in your name. Demand their safe and swift return.

Stand up for your rights as a citizen. And not only your rights, but the rights of every other man, woman and child around you. Because today it may be they who are mistreated and abused, but tomorrow it may be you.

Stand up and demand better of your politicians who commit atrocities in your name! Show the world the true meaning of what it is to live as a free American, in a actual, honest, respectful Democracy. Use the power that so many people have died to give you! Use your voice! Speak freely and loudly!

Stand and face the world and show them the proud humility and honor that is the American Spirit. Show them the strength it takes to admit a mistake and try to make amends. Show the world just what it really means to be an American!

Your world, our world, will never be what we want it to be if we don't take action. Not next year, or next month. Not even next week, or tomorrow. Today. Today is the day.

Take 15 minutes today and call or write one of the elected officials who represent you. Tell them briefly what you want them to do. Because that is why they are in office. To do what you tell them to do! And warn them that if they don't, you will never vote for them again!

And then tomorrow, do it again. And again the next day. And again the next. Do a different elected official each day and make sure they all know how you feel and what you plan to do about it.

Fifteen minutes. That's all it would take.

Fifteen minutes a day to change the world.

Would you spend fifteen minutes a day if you knew if could save your child from pain or suffering? Your father? Your mother? Your sister or brother? Your best friend?

Would you take fifteen minutes to save yourself?

Is that too much to ask?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

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

Anti-War March? not going to do a thing--no one listens
Posted by: militaryhater on Oct 5, 2007 10:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This writer needs to understand that Congress is lost. Democrats don't have a majority and they can't over-ride the Republican control of the Congress which supports Imperialism, greed and controlling the OIL. Some Democrats, as we have seen, voted to support a war with Iran including Hillary. Why is Hillary in the lead? ....because she is on the same page as Republicans...who want her elected to continue their agenda in the Middle East. And as a woman, she could lose and they would still win as a Republican would keep this agenda going. They don't lose do they?

Why can't no one see on these blogs that Congress supports the war both Democrats and Republicans? Both parties want to control the Middle East and 'secure' the oil. Yes, world we are down to the last supplies of OIL and there is money to be made from the last sources. Unfortunately, it is in the Middle East...the fertile crescent..Dinosaur gold.

These constant stories about how marching will make a difference, writing our congress people will make a difference, just doesn't work anymore. We have tried it and Washington doesn't care. We mean nothing to them or our agendas.. we are not rich corporations.

The Rich corporations now control our country, the Supreme Court, and the Congress. No protests are going to stop their War machine agenda. We are a country built on making money on wars. Look at our past! Corporations make tons of money during war...they don't make much in peace. They have learned how much money they can make...so war continues to be our most important objective.

Anti-war marches don't work. The media never covers them, people are afraid to march as they are being watched by our goverment. We can be put on 'no-fly-lists and God knows what else...maybe they can start calling us Terrorists as we don't support the Bush agenda and be locked up just like the poor guys in Guantanamo. NO chance for a trial ever....thanks to the great Patriot act.

It is too late..we let the new war like regime in Washington take over...As Americans all we cared about was material wealth, what car we drove and if we were better than our neighbors. We blindly kept going and continued our lives oblivious to this group of people plotting this agenda since the 70s...like Cheney, Rumsfeld and others...since the Nixon era. Now reality is here and the war doesn't stop. The drums continue. I don't see the answer to this problem in the article..it isn't there. We don't have the power....the rich do. How do we stop them? Who has the answer?

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

We are doomed!!!!!!!
Posted by: Nugeman on Oct 5, 2007 12:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You have all read it here before now. Bush and his policies have changed America. He is evil, he is a dictator, he thinks he's King etc.etc.etc. There will not be an election in 2008 because King George W will not give up power.

The only answer is for all of us to move. Cuba and Venezuela are calling. Let's go hang with Sean Penn, Danny Glover, Harry Belafonte and the like as we cavort with Comrade Hugo.
Do it, the sooner the better.

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

Arrest them
Posted by: P. Hermes on Oct 5, 2007 3:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is there any way under the constitution, other than impeachment/conviction that these murdering and treasonous scheistkopfs can be otherwise arrested and removed?

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

» There is a way Posted by: dustdevil
George And Dick
Posted by: InsertNameHere on Oct 5, 2007 8:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Someone inside the administration who still loves democracy, please, just arrange to have George and Dick sedated, black-bagged and dropped off just outside of the Green Zone?
Just wake them up and kick em in the ass and send them packing. Hand them a couple of cotton fishing vests and tell them it's a new kind of 'faith-based' body armor.

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

Bill Moyers Journal is all about this possible war 10-5-07
Posted by: Missing Piece on Oct 5, 2007 9:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just got done watching Bill Moyers Journal and it speaks entirely of this possible war and why. It is excellant, I'm sure it will be posted by someone soon

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

When one plays with matches......
Posted by: compu on Oct 5, 2007 11:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The name of the game for the big players,(oil interest)in
the region is keep the turmoul alive,Iraq desarray,equal
83 dollars barrel oil this week.War with Iran 100 d-b ?
Its possible its just a ploy to keep fleecing us.
In the other hand the powder keg of Pakistan may explode
when bombs start falling in another muslim nation,if the clerics
topple the goverment,then the Saudi oil field,and all of us
will have to be more than concerned.

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

dick
Posted by: rtmyth on Oct 6, 2007 2:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The power elite want the forthcoming war on Iran. Israel is all for it and lobbys intensely for it. It is inevitable. The masses are powerless and have no influence.

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

SURELY MOST PEOPLE KNOW THAT BUSHES & BIN LADENS ARE FRIENDS
Posted by: SALLY EVANS on Oct 6, 2007 8:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
INVESTIGATE IT ON YOUR OWN. THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS KNOW THAT BUSH WILL NEVER TOUCH BIN LADEN.

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

War on Iran, and a few questions for Cheney/Bush
Posted by: Age of Reason on Oct 7, 2007 6:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you, Mr. Ritter, for remaining vocal and keeping your focus on what you consider the most severe threat to our own stability by the current dangerously evil cabal in control of my country's government. Indeed, I'd seen the signs, and read the stories, and know the history. I recently finished reading your book "Target Iran" and your conclusion should be required reading.

I just cannot help but wonder: what would it be like to be able to subject Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney to "enhanced interrogation techniques?" Surely it would be a wonderful opportunity to get some of their insights into their plans for world chaos, and U.S. hegemony and empire. Their "wars" are going precisely as planned, in my opinion. There never was - and never will be - any plan to leave Iraq. It only remains to determine the schedule for continued excursions into Iran until the point that we actually start raining bombs on them. (Of course, it seems probably that we'd use our Israeli proxy to actually initiate the attacks.)

While being subjected to "enhanced interrogation" wouldn't it be interesting to toss in some questions about 9/11? These lying bastards would crack with the first waterboarding, or long night of freezing cold while being forced to listen to Mos Def...

Next up in their sights: Venezuela. When to we "liberate" them [from their oil]?

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