Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

258 posts / 0 new
Last post
Subprime JD's picture
Subprime JD
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 17 2009
Posts: 562
Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Check out the latest poll re Americans and Iran,

Americans, not surprisingly, are highly aggressive when it comes to using military force against Iran, the poll says, with 66 per cent in the US supporting the option.

http://gulfnews.com/opinions/editorials/negotiation-is-the-way-ahead-with-tehran-1.643347

Also, consider this Gallup poll in Feb 2010,

A Gallup poll finds 61% of Americans viewing the military power of Iran as a critical threat to U.S. vital interests over the next 10 years. An additional 29% say Iran is an important, though not a critical, threat to the United States.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/125996/View-Iran-Critical-Threat-Interests.aspx

So, with the above info and all the other news, sanctions, drum beating, etc, what probability do you put on the US attacking Iran in the next 24 months?

I put it at 95% chance. I reserve a 5% chance of it not going down in the event that some sanity comes back in the picture. The latest sanctions, the amount of media focus, public support of military action, all lead me to believe on the 95% forecast.

Please put forth your views and why. My concern with Iran is (1) people will die (2) more spending/deficit (3) oil prices will shoot through the roof in the event of a attack.

 

rowmat's picture
rowmat
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 15 2008
Posts: 358
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

The buzz acronym for justifying the invasion of Iraq was 'WMD'.

Of course we now know that this was bullsh*t.

However the 'sheeple' are still so f*cking completely stupid that all that is required to fool them yet again is to still use the WMD excuse except avoid using the actual term 'WMD'... just in case something registers in their tiny pea brains.

However I wouldn't bother even doing that. Just call it 'WMD'... don't worry 'sheeple' have an extremely short attention span.

Just tell them Bin Laden is now living in Iran and that will do it.

Oh that 's right, Mossad has already made that claim!

Okay then, just get on with wiping Iran off the map so we can all get back to celebrity worship!

I think from now on I'll reserve the term 'useless eaters' for the 'sheeple'!

I really can't be f*cked anymore!

docmims's picture
docmims
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 17 2009
Posts: 644
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

I think Obama is distancing himself from the Israeli's to provide plausible deniability when the Israeli's take Iran out.

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 864
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?
docmims wrote:

I think Obama is distancing himself from the Israeli's to provide plausible deniability when the Israeli's take Iran out.

Great point, the disingenuous creep!

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1444
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

100%

In fact, I'd give it a 50% chance that it'll happen before the November elections. 

And as for the Israeli's and Obama, good points but in all reality, it's a farce.  I watched a little of Obama/Netenyahu in the white house.  When Obama would speak, Net would be staring him down to make sure he said the EXACTLY proper words.  Net is quite a few grades higher than Obama (in the pyramid), so he was in total control of the events. 

IMO, Israel will attack first....Iran will respond......US will respond under the "gotta protect our Israeli friends" story........What China and India do after that is the kicker.  It sounds like Russia is in the bag already. 

I feel very bad for the Iranian people.  They are one of the most beautiful, kind, intelligent, educated people on this planet.  And Americans have zero knowledge of this.  What a waste.

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Iran has finally raised the central issue of western hypocrisy:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Thursday that the United States must make its position on Israel's nuclear strategy clear before talks on Tehran's atomic program could resume.

Sanctions imposed by "arrogant" Western powers would not slow Iran's nuclear progress, he said. "The first condition (for talks to resume) is they should express their views about the nuclear weapons of the Zionist regime. Do they agree with that or not. If they agree that these bombs should be available to them, the course of the dialogue would be different," he said, speaking in Nigeria. (Reuters)

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3917356,00.html

Israel has both nuclear warheads (an estimated 200) and sophisticated delivery systems (bombers, rockets, etc.). Iran currently has neither. Moreover, Israel's June 1981 air strike on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor demonstrates a credible threat of unilateral attack.

If the true objective were to avert violence in the region, efforts would be made to apply the same nuclear regulation regime to all nuclear powers. Israel would be a higher priority than Iran, because its nuclear capabilities are more advanced, thanks to a 45-year head start. Mutual inspection for confidence-building was a key feature of U.S.-Soviet nuclear agreements during the Cold War. It worked.

But of course, peace and confidence-building aren't the objective. The U.S. is pushing one set of rules for the 'bad guys' (Iran), and a 'free pass' for its 'good guy' client state. This is obviously unfair, and states who line up on the opposite side aren't going to accept it.

What's stunning is the hubris of the United States in throwing its weight around, when it is utterly dependent on energy imports and capital imports (rolling over short-term debt to the tune of as much as $100 billion a week).

The U.S. clings to an anachronistic self-image, stuck in the 1991 time warp of 'the world's only superpower.' Like the USSR which collapsed in that year, the U.S. economy is now badly hollowed out. 'Defense' [i.e. aggression and occupation] spending is bleeding a flood of capital which should have been invested domestically. Sustained malinvestment is a certain road to ruin. The arms race broke the back of the USSR; the U.S. is pursuing an identical course to destruction.

If the U.S. stupidly chooses to open yet another war front, or to allow its proxy to do so, its own stability and existence will be on the line. Its two glaring Achilles heels are energy supply and capital supply. An interruption of either one could put our lights out. The catastrophe would be self-imposed -- no different than striding into a biker bar, confronting a burly guy with tattoos on his muscled biceps, and announcing 'Hey, meathead, you look like a flaming pansy.' Most observers would say the 'victim' had it coming to him ...

Johnny Oxygen's picture
Johnny Oxygen
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 9 2009
Posts: 1443
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

I've posted many times about this issue of the US on going foot-hold in the middle east for the final knock-down-drag-out with very little interest in response. IMO this issue effects the 3 E's perhaps more than anything else. I would think on this site especially there would be a 'definitive' thread on this topic. Here is one: http://www.peakprosperity.com/forum/upcoming-knock-down-dragout-middle-east/32598

After reading this article 

http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/10004

it got me thinking about Obama's about-face on the wars in Iraq and arguably Afghanistan. If you look at the map of the middle east you can see that the US occupies countries on Iran's east and west borders. Is the reason he doesn't fullfill his campaign promise to get out of Iraq because he knows that Israel is going to attack Iran? I don't mean that he suspects but rather that he absolutely knows, that there are plans already in the works for a middle east showdown that will include Pakistan as well. Who are the players? What is the plan?

This is also very enlightening: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-preparing-bomb-iran/story?id=8765343

Now the Pentagon is shifting spending from other programs to fast forward the development and procurement of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator. The Pentagon comptroller sent a request to shift the funds to the House and Senate Appropriations and Armed Services Committees over the summer. The comptroller said the Pentagon planned to spend $19.1 million to procure four of the bombs, $28.3 million to accelerate the bomb's "development and testing", and $21 million to accelerate the integration of the bomb onto B-2 stealth bombers.

It obvious, to me at least, that it is no accident that we are in Afghanistan, Irag and Pakistan, to some degree. There will be a final war over the last of the oild reserves. Its my assertion that the US and Israel already have a plan in the works for Iran. One question I have posed is how would the geographical/political 'sides' break down.

The BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) would hold together IMO. Russia is also a strong ally of Iran. So what about the US? We would ally with Britan, perhaps Germany and eventually France. Australia, Israel and a few South American countries. I would also ask people to consider how technilogically top heavy the US armed forces are. We have a very expensive, highly technical military. Germany had this same type of military in WWII. But they were beat down by the Russians through shear will and overwhelming numbers of, men, tanks and guns they could produce. Could the US hold out with its expensive advanced technology against an enemy like China who could out produce us in terms of tanks, men, planes, natural resources such as oil, metals and so on?

There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of talk about this 800 pound gorilla.

Subprime JD's picture
Subprime JD
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 17 2009
Posts: 562
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Great feedback and thoughts everyone. I would like to add this to the discussion:

1. Russia appears to have pulled a bait and switch on Iran as of late. Lets not forget that Russia is a huge oil exporter and probably would not mind watching the price of its key export double in price.

2. Arab states have no problem watching the US/Israel take out Irans nuclear program and military. Arabs and Persians have been in conflict for some time now. For the Saudis, who also happen to export more than 8 million barrels a day, watching crude rocket over $100 would be like manna falling from heaven. They get wealthier, a competitor gets taken down leaving more power for them.

http://jta.org/news/article/2010/06/17/2739662/poll-arab-countries-favor-tough-iran-sanctions

3. Americans dont want to believe that another war is coming. People are in denial about this. Of course, enough fear mongering by the press corps in the MSM and propoganda that a "4 week campaign" like desert shield would be sufficient to eradicate the "Iranian threat" should be sufficient to muster enough support from the broken and defeated American populace.

Here is a twist in the timeline..

Israel asked Washington for a green light to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities but was told no, reports the Guardian. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made the request in a private meeting with President Bush in May, but Bush feared air strikes over several days would lead to full-scale war and terrorist attacks in the US. 

http://www.newser.com/story/38423/bush-blocked-israel-attack-on-iran.html#ixzz0tOP7EaZ2

I remember reading this story before the Obama/McCain election. I was surprised at the time but it also made sense. Starting a war in the midst of a change in administration seemed too dicey. Also, the banking crisis and the collapse of economy surely kept the powers that be focused on domestic matters for some time. I strongly believe that the crash in the economy came as a complete shock to them. Perhaps Bush was war weary at that point, having watching Iraq fall apart and Afghanistan beginning to heat up. Now we have the Obama administration, which is fresh and thus, more capable and willing of fulfilling the orders of the central planners, whomever they may be.

Johnny O raises a good point, talking about the longer term implications and strategies of the wars we are pursuing. Because so few are in the dark about PO and its attendant problems, they refuse to believe that "energy" is the motive. There are others who simply state, "we need the oil, so fu*k them". On a longer term horizon, it appears that the plan is country after country, every few years. Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003, Iran 2010/2011. To those who doubt his/our thesis on the motives for the wars, consider how North Korea recently sank a submarine, yet no saber rattling from the US. Just some "stern language". No resources, no war.

 

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

I agree with LR. It will probably happen this year with Israel leading the way. As far as lack of discussion on this topic it has happened very frequently here in other threads. i know a lot of people on this site do not like Mike Ruppert (style over substance) but he was on to this whole scenario a long time ago.

Two really good reads are Crossing the Rubicon by Ruppert and The Sorrows of Empire by Chalmers Johnson. 

American foreign policy is determined by the CFR which is an outgrowth of the Roundtable groups of Cecil Rhodes. The creation of the state of Israel was initiated in the early 20th century by Britain under the auspices of the Balfour Declaration. Balfour was a member of Rhodes inner circle.

Rhodes like Morgan and others were bankrolled by the Rothschilds. This is a geopolitical game that has been mapped out for quite awhile. It is about power and money and only concerns us the wee people insofar as the chess board requires pawns to be sacrificed for the King. We will be informed on a need to know basis and public emotions will be duly manipulated to achieve the desired results a la Edward Bernays. All of this has been documented and discussed here in great detail albeit mostly in the basement where some of the most informative, rational and polite conversations take place on this site.

V

 

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?
bearmarkettrader wrote:

2. Arab states have no problem watching the US/Israel take out Irans nuclear program and military. Arabs and Persians have been in conflict for some time now. For the Saudis, who also happen to export more than 8 million barrels a day, watching crude rocket over $100 would be like manna falling from heaven. They get wealthier, a competitor gets taken down leaving more power for them.

http://jta.org/news/article/2010/06/17/2739662/poll-arab-countries-favor-tough-iran-sanctions

It's interesting to review the previous precedent, the Israeli bombing of Iraq's reactor in 1981. A couple of pertinent points from the Wikipedia article:

1. Israeli aircraft [apparently without permission] flew over Saudi airspace at 800 ft altitude, undetected. This previous bombing run, along with Saudi ambivalence or hostility to Iran, may be the reason for recent rumours that Saudi Arabia has given tacit permission to Israel to use the same route again. [Iran is east of Iraq, labeled in the upper right corner of the map]

2. Quoting from Wikipedia:

Israel's action was condemned by the international community. The UN General Assembly passed Resolution No. 36/27 of 13 November 1981 characterizing the bombing as a premeditated and unprecedented act of aggression, and demanding that Israel pay prompt and adequate compensation for the damage and loss of life it had caused.[2] The resolution also sharply warned Israel to refrain from taking such measures in the future.

In addition the United Nations Security Council strongly condemned the attack as a clear violation of the Charter and held that Iraq was entitled to appropriate redress for the destruction caused. The resolution further called upon Israel to place its own nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards.[10] The United States supported this resolution as it condemned the action, not the nation.

Here is an example of double standards. UN Security Council resolution 1929 [the recent Iran sanctions] is being strictly enforced, at least by the U.S. and Europe. Whereas, the 29-year-old Security Council resolution 487, calling for Israel to put its nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, remains unfilled. Selective enforcement of UNSC resolutions by the U.S. is very evident to Iran. It leaves the U.S. in a compromised position, cherry picking the UNSC resolutions it wants to abide by, while aiding and abetting a flagrant violator of others.

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

In an article published in the September 2010 Atlantic Monthly, Jeffrey Goldberg writes:

[In] March of 2009, I had an extended discussion about the Iranian nuclear program with Benjamin Netanyahu, hours before he was sworn in as Israel’s prime minister. In the months since then, I have interviewed roughly 40 current and past Israeli decision makers about a military strike, as well as many American and Arab officials.

In most of these interviews, I have asked a simple question: what is the percentage chance that Israel will attack the Iranian nuclear program in the near future? Not everyone would answer this question, but a consensus emerged that there is a better than 50 percent chance that Israel will launch a strike by next July.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/1969/12/the-point-of-no-return/8186/

Goldberg's 'consensus estimate' is probably as good as any. Much of his article is devoted to describing the elaborate dance between Israeli and US officials, both trying to ascertain each other's intentions. 

Here is a particularly distressing passage from his article:

I spoke with several Israeli officials who are grappling with this question, among others: what if American intelligence learns about Israeli intentions hours before the scheduled launch of an attack?

“It is a nightmare for us,” one of these officials told me. “What if President Obama calls up Bibi and says, ‘We know what you’re doing. Stop immediately.’ Do we stop? We might have to. A decision has been made that we can’t lie to the Americans about our plans. We don’t want to inform them beforehand. This is for their sake and for ours. So what do we do? These are the hard questions.”

(Two officials suggested that Israel may go on pre-attack alert a number of times before actually striking: “After the fifth or sixth time, maybe no one would believe that we’re really going,” one official said.)

For Obama to allow such insinuations that the US might be blind-sided to pass unchallenged, suggests extremely weak, compromised leadership. The US is massively exposed to the damaging consequences of an Israeli surprise attack on Iran. Passively waiting for a nasty surprise from a purported 'ally' is a losing strategy.

dshields's picture
dshields
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 24 2009
Posts: 599
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

the leadership of iran has made it quite clear they believe that israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.  this is a pretty serious thing and they have to take it seriously or die.  the iranian government laughs at obama because they know he is weak and possibly sympathetic to their point of view - the jews are evil and as a result god wants them to die.  i do not believe that.  i do believe that israel must defend itself.  if iran gets the bomb they will give one or more to terror groups and they will use them.  what are you going to do then ?  what are we going to do when one goes off in tel aviv  or washington or london ?  no, the iranians can not be allowed to get the bomb and the world has to band together to stop them by whatever means necessary.

[Moderator's note:  This type of post needs to be supported by factual information.  Please cite specific facts to support your idea of Iran's official ideological and theological position.  This is how a discussion must progress from mere conclusory statements to an informed analysis.]

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

rowmat, I agree with your sentiments.  Our attack against Iraq and the subsequent death of over a million innocent Iraqis was a crime against humanity.  No one was held accountable - Americans don't seem to care as they were only muslims.

Ariel Sharon was right when he said "don't worry about American pressure, we...control America."  The democrats and republicans are almost always unanimous when it comes to protecting Israel no matter what the costs.  Their economy is doing good while we are broke but they have no problem taking as much as they can get from us.

V's picture
V
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 14 2009
Posts: 849
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?
dshields wrote:

the leadership of iran has made it quite clear they believe that israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.  this is a pretty serious thing and they have to take it seriously or die.  the iranian government laughs at obama because they know he is weak and possibly sympathetic to their point of view - the jews are evil and as a result god wants them to die.  i do not believe that.  i do believe that israel must defend itself.  if iran gets the bomb they will give one or more to terror groups and they will use them.  what are you going to do then ?  what are we going to do when one goes off in tel aviv  or washington or london ?  no, the iranians can not be allowed to get the bomb and the world has to band together to stop them by whatever means necessary.

Are you joking?

V

LogansRun's picture
LogansRun
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2009
Posts: 1444
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

I don't think so.  This is the type of thinking that got us to where we're at today.  

As for what you said dshields, stop drinking the MSM coolaid please.  Iran has zero intention of using a nuclear device on the US or any other country.  Israel included.  The bluster you hear is what the US Gov't wants you to hear.  

You don't know my background, but some here will vouch,  I can tell you without a bit of doubt that the Iranians are an extremely well educated, loving, beautiful people that would much rather be friends with the US than fight us.  But if it comes down to it, they'll fight to the death!  And this isn't Iraq we're talking about!  This is a country of 3X the size in population, military might and Will that Iraq was!  The US will lose half it's ships in the strait and would probably have to resort to Nukes to get the job done.  And needless to say, Russia and China probably wouldn't just stand by and allow that to happen without serious repercussions.

Anyway, stop reading MSNBS, CNN, FoxNews, and get a thought process of your own.  You'll understand the world much better in the long run!

V wrote:
dshields wrote:

the leadership of iran has made it quite clear they believe that israel should be wiped off the face of the earth.  this is a pretty serious thing and they have to take it seriously or die.  the iranian government laughs at obama because they know he is weak and possibly sympathetic to their point of view - the jews are evil and as a result god wants them to die.  i do not believe that.  i do believe that israel must defend itself.  if iran gets the bomb they will give one or more to terror groups and they will use them.  what are you going to do then ?  what are we going to do when one goes off in tel aviv  or washington or london ?  no, the iranians can not be allowed to get the bomb and the world has to band together to stop them by whatever means necessary.

Are you joking?

V

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

When many of us were kids, it was seriously believed that the Soviet Union intended to destroy America. The Curtis LeMay crowd wanted to preëmptively attack the Soviet Union in a desperate attempt to wipe out their nuclear arsenal first. Fortunately these crazies did not prevail.

Iran is centrifuging uranium, but its use in weapons is purely speculative at this point. "Saddam's WMDs" were purely speculative too, and look where that got us (and them).

Israel has a nasty habit of preëmptive attacks -- Osirik 1981; Syria 2009. Letting a small client state dictate the regional strategy is a case of the tail wagging the dog. The subtle message woven into Jeffrey Goldberg's essay is that this situation is acceptable and normal. His article is a sophisticated 'softening up' exercise to coöpt opposition.

But the US has plenty of leverage over Israel, and should use it just as Eisenhower did, when he summarily ordered Israel to back off during the Suez crisis. An elephant isn't obliged to take orders from a gnat. No one has to apologize for putting US interests first.

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

THIS JUST IN -- so much for rumors of a split between Russia and Iran:

MOSCOW (AP) - Russia's nuclear agency said Friday that it will load fuel into Iran's first nuclear power plant next week, defying U.S. calls to hold off the start of the launch.

Rosatom spokesman Sergei Novikov said Friday that uranium fuel shipped by Russia will be loaded into the Bushehr reactor on Aug. 21, beginning the startup process.

"From that moment the Bushehr plant will be officially considered a nuclear-energy installation," he told The Associated Press.

The United States has called for Russia to delay the startup until Iran proves that it's not developing nuclear weapons. Russian officials said that the latest U.N. sanctions against Iran won't affect the Bushehr project.

Russia signed a $1 billion contract in 1995 for building the Bushehr plant, but it has dragged its feet on completing the project for years.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100813/D9HIIF400.html

Anyone up for a US-Russia conflict, fought through Israeli and Iranian proxies? 

Count me out, thanks. South America is looking better all the time. Embarassed

cmartenson's picture
cmartenson
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 7 2007
Posts: 5979
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Rosatom spokesman Sergei Novikov said Friday that uranium fuel shipped by Russia will be loaded into the Bushehr reactor on Aug. 21, beginning the startup process.

Hmmmm...didn't Israel bomb the Iraq reactor in 1981 right before it got fueled?  You know, because bombing a fully fueled reactor tends to be a much bigger PR headache than boming an empty one?

Dang.

That's a game-changer.

Looks like we've got to keep en elevated alert status around here for the next eight days.

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Background on the Bushehr nuclear plant:

Despite American reservations about the facility, nuclear experts say Bushehr does not contain sensitive technology, which is why it does not figure in any UN security council resolutions. Moreover, Bushehr has no link with Iran's secretive uranium enrichment programme, seen as the main "weaponisation" threat, at other installations.

"The Iranians have been able to go ahead with Bushehr because it's clean," said a nuclear expert, adding that the light-water reactor in Bushehr was internationally tolerated because of Russia's involvement.

Moscow points out that the project has been closely supervised by the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and that Iran has signed a pledge to ship all the spent uranium fuel from Bushehr back to Russia for reprocessing, ruling out the possibility that any of it could used to make nuclear weapons.

Construction of this, Iran's first nuclear plant, was begun in 1975 by several German companies. They pulled out following a US embargo on high-technology supplies to Iran, after the 1979 Islamic revolution and the subsequent US embassy siege in Tehran. Russia stepped in and agreed to build the 1,000-megawatt reactor 15 years ago, in a project that has been likened to efforts to fix a German engine in a Russian car.

Delays have plagued the $1bn (£640,000) project, with diplomats saying that Moscow has used it as a lever in relations with Tehran. Iran has had to put up with the long timescale because it has no other potential nuclear partners.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/13/iran-nuclear-power-plant-russia

We'll see how the formidable US Mainstream Media presents these distinctions.

Farmer Brown's picture
Farmer Brown
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Nov 23 2008
Posts: 1503
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Well now, doesn't this violate the US's recent decision to not trade with or allow financial activities with States or companies that trade with Iran?  Doesn't shipping them uranium constitute trade? 

Time to keep a second pair of clean underwear at the ready!

 

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

More from the NYT:

The statement set a precise date for what the Russians have described as the first of a three-step process for starting one of their nuclear power plants.

In the first step, fuel is shifted from storage to the reactor chamber. In the second, it is loaded into the hardened stainless steel core. In a final step, the fuel rods are moved closer together to begin the nuclear reaction.

Russian officials have said the next two steps will take a few months.

The process will not introduce new nuclear material into Iran; Russia delivered the shipment of low-enriched uranium fuel under an agreement that would require Iran to send the spent fuel back to Russia for disposal. The Russian fuel has been kept under International Atomic Energy Agency seal.

The United States under a policy put in place by the Bush administration has supported the Russian fuel shipments, though not the decision to start the plant. The Russian fuel meets all the needs for the Bushehr plant, largely removing the rationale for an enrichment program.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/world/europe/14bushehr.html?_r=1&hp

Yet in its lead paragraph, the NYT says the move is 'sure to disappoint United States diplomats trying to halt Iran's nuclear program,' thus blurring the distinction between the IAEA-supervised reactor and the controversial uranium enrichment taking place elsewhere. 

Par for the MSM course. Undecided

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

"These wars are designed to build a monstorous private military industrial complex using U.S. tax dollars.  Of the forces deployed around the world, in our name, 69% are private contractors.  And 80% of them are foreign nationals.

These are people fighting for a paycheck...not a country."

!

Some say that the U.S. is an empire but that simply isn't true.  The empire is built around the international bank cartel.  America is being used and simultaneously attacked just like Iraq, Afghanistan and maybe Iran.  Our forces may be paid for and partially manned by Americans but we are losing control.

...New York Times reported on an ongoing investigation poised to prove that private security companies "are using American money to bribe the Taliban" to fuel combat and thus enhance demand for their services. The news follows a "series of events last month that suggested all-out collusion with the insurgents," the Times said.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) "Is the U.S. paying for attacks on U.S. troops?”

"Our troops are dying in Afghanistan, and now it turns out we may be funding their killers...Our continued presence in Afghanistan is detrimental to our security...The American people are paying to prop up a corrupt government that may be using our money to pay private companies to drum up business by paying the insurgents to attack our troops."  - complete article link

Larry

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern provides some useful background on Jeffrey Goldberg, which suggests that Goldberg's Atlantic Monthly article and subsequent TV interviews may be thinly-disguised agitprop:

On Oct. 3, 2002, as America’s war fever was building just a week before Congress caved to the President, Goldberg wrote in Slate, the online magazine:

“The [Bush] administration is planning … to launch what many people would undoubtedly call a short-sighted and inexcusable act of aggression. In five years, however, I believe that the coming invasion of Iraq will be remembered as an act of profound morality.”

Even earlier, on March 25, 2002, Goldberg filled the pages of The New Yorker with a mammoth 17,000-word story hyping Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s ties to terrorism and glossing over the ambiguities regarding the gassing of civilians in the Kurdish city of Halabja during the Iran-Iraq war.

Goldberg’s magnum opus, entitled “The Great Terror,” earned him high marks from other neocons and essentially “made” his career. The story was also made to order, so to speak, to support the efforts of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney to paint Saddam Hussein as a ruthless dictator who had to be removed.

For a 44-year-old writer, Goldberg surely has been around. He left college to move to Israel where he served with the Israeli army as a prison guard at the Ketziot military prison camp during the First Intifada; he also wrote for The Jerusalem Post. Upon his return to the U.S., he worked for the Jewish daily Forward and eventually got hired by The New Yorker. Now, he’s a star writer for The Atlantic.

http://counterpunch.org/mcgovern08132010.html

Huh -- one might have thought the Atlantic Monthly would disclose Goldberg's service in the Israeli army. But even his posted biography -- two clicks deep from the article itself -- doesn't mention it. 

http://www.theatlantic.com/jeffrey-goldberg/#toggleBio

Evidently conflict of interest isn't a problem for the Mainstream Media, at least when it's glossed over for a 'good cause.'

 

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Iran vs Israel: What The Media Wants You To Forget


1. Last Spring, Rose Gottemoeller, an assistant secretary of state and Washington's chief nuclear arms negotiator, asked Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Israel refused.

2. The United Nations passed a resolution calling on Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused.

3. The IAEA asked Israel to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and to submit to inspections. Israel refused.

4. Iran's formal notification to the IAEA of the planned construction of the backup fuel-rod facility underscores that Iran is playing by the rules of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Iran has signed.

5. Iran allows IAEA inspections of all its facilities.

6. Contrary to face-saving claims, it appears that the US and Israel were both caught off guard by Iran's announcement. The reasoning is simple. Had the US or Israel announced the existence of he new facility before Iran's notified the IAEA, it would have put Iran on the defensive. As it is now, the US and Israel seem to be playing catch up, casting doubt on the veracity of Israel's claims to "know" that Iran is a nuclear threat.

7. The IAEA and all 16 United States Intelligence Agencies are unanimous in agreement that Iran is not building and does not possess nuclear weapons.

8. In 1986, Mordachai Vanunu blew the whistle and provided photographs showing Israel's clandestine nuclear weapons factory underneath the reactor at Dimona.

9. Israel made the same accusations against Iraq that it is making against Iran, leading up to Israel's bombing of the power station at Osirik. Following the invasion of 2003, international experts examined the ruins of the power station at Osirik and found no evidence of a clandestine weapons factory in the rubble.

10. The United Nations has just released the Goldstone Report, a scathing report which accuses Israel of 37 specific war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza earlier this year. Israel has denounced the report as "Anti-Semitic (even though Judge Goldstone is himself Jewish), and the United States will block the report from being referred to the War Crimes Tribunal at the Hague, thereby making the US Government an accessory after-the-fact.

11. Recently revealed documents prove not only that Israel has nuclear weapos, but actually tried to sell some to Apartheid South Africa. Who else Israel approached to sell nuclear weapons remains an unasked question.

12. In 1965, Israel stole over 200-600 pounds of weapons-grade uranium from the United States.

13. Declassified documents from the former South African regime prove not only that Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades, but has tried to sell them to other countries!

We all need to be Joe Wilson right now. We need to stand up and scream, "LIAR!" at every politician and every talking media moron that is pushing this war in Iran. And we need to keep dong it until they get the message that we will not be deceived any more.

Complete article link

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Under the harsh unilateral US sanctions, which go far beyond those authorized by the UN Security Council, US Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey is now trying to drive Iranian banks out of third countries -- the damned cheek! From the FT:

Although Washington has already blacklisted 16 Iranian banks and many Revolutionary Guard units, until now the main impact of those designations has been to ban other financial institutions from accessing the US market on their behalf.

Now the US will take action against banks involved in “significant” transactions anywhere in the world with the designated groups.

“It puts at risk something very important for every financial institution, namely their access to the US, for engaging in transactions with these identified parties,” said Mr Levey, who is currently on a trip to the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and Bahrain to hammer his message home to banks and government officials.

All three countries host subsidiaries of Iranian banks designated by the US. Other Treasury officials have taken or are taking the message to countries such as Japan, Brazil and Turkey.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9f6c5230-a897-11df-86dd-00144feabdc0.html

Crude oil is priced in dollars. If Iran cannot receive dollars for its crude exports, and pay dollars for its food, fuel and medicine imports, results similar to the US blockade on Iraq between the first and second wars can be expected -- including higher child mortality.

Stuart Levey is doing enormous damage to US national interests in committing these reckless acts of war against Iran. A holdover from the Bush administration, Levey is living proof that mad, bad Barack O'Bomber has changed nothing.

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Stuart Levey crows in the FT about his efforts to shut down Iranian shipping:

In June, the UN named three IRISL (Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines) companies for sanctions, and called for additional vigilance of Iranian shipping more generally. It also granted new powers to inspect Iranian ships, and ships carrying cargo to or from Iran. Subsequently the US Treasury sanctioned five IRISL front companies and 27 vessels, and also identified 71 renamed IRISL vessels. Last month the EU took similar actions.

Following these steps, last Friday the US Treasury took further measures, designating for sanctions three Malta-based IRISL companies: Marble Shipping Limited and Bushehr Shipping Company, two entities directly owned by IRISL; and ISI Maritime Limited, owned by a previously-designated IRISL subsidiary Irano Hind.

Iran also uses non-Iranian shippers and freight forwarders to obtain and export dangerous materials. As the vice tightens, we expect this pattern to increase. So, over the past year, OFAC increased enforcement efforts in the shipping and freight forwarding sectors, and also investigated a number of sanctions violations.

During this time, the US Treasury has also agreed significant financial settlements with four US shipping companies, based on alleged violations of sanctions involving third-country trade with sanctioned parties, including Iran: Oxbow Carbon and Minerals; Maersk Line, a US subsidiary of A.P. Moller-Maersk; Barwil Agencies; and National Marine Consultants. Other cases are being investigated, and follow settlements reached over the past year with major banks, including Lloyds and Credit Suisse.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d09260fc-a89c-11df-86dd-00144feabdc0.html

Levey claims that his actions are aimed at stopping ‘dangerous materials.’ Yet he cites not a single example of seized contraband. Meanwhile, the obvious, intended effect of his sanctions is to shut down all shipping to and from Iran. Sanctioning vessels and shipping lines imposes a blanket halt on cargo movement.

Similarly, when Congress passed the unilateral US sanctions, Lloyd’s withdrew insurance coverage for Iranian voyages the next day. Now we find out why, as Levey admits to extorting a ’settlement’ from the company last year.

This is smelling more and more like the sanctions against Iraq between the first and second wars. Madeleine Albright said excess mortality of half a million Iraqi children was an acceptable cost of the sanctions. The great humanitarian Stuart Levey probably figures he can triple those numbers in Iran. After all, it’s for a good cause — which is ... uh, well ... you tell me!

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

'Mr. Milk Moustache' -- Bush's idiot UN ambassador who had to leave because the Senate wouldn't confirm him -- turns up the heat:

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Israel has "eight days" to launch a military strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear facility and stop Tehran from acquiring a functioning atomic plant, a former US envoy to the UN has said.

Iran is to bring online its first nuclear power reactor, built with Russia's help, on August 21, when a shipment of nuclear fuel will be loaded into the plant's core.

At that point, John Bolton warned Monday, it will be too late for Israel to launch a military strike against the facility because any attack would spread radiation and affect Iranian civilians.

"Once that uranium, once those fuel rods are very close to the reactor, certainly once they're in the reactor, attacking it means a release of radiation, no question about it," Bolton told Fox Business Network.

"So if Israel is going to do anything against Bushehr it has to move in the next eight days."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100817/wl_afp/irannuclearpoliticsisraelusmilitary_20100817120240

Bolton is too dense to understand that the Russian-supplied fuel for this power-generation reactor is under IAEA bond and inspection. It has nothing to do with uranium centrifuging underway elsewhere.

If I spot this loony-tard on the streets of New York, I'm gonna attempt a citizen's arrest. Wink

 

machinehead's picture
machinehead
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 18 2008
Posts: 1077
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

'Mr. Milk Moustache' -- Bush's idiot UN ambassador who had to leave because the Senate wouldn't confirm him -- turns up the heat:

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Israel has "eight days" to launch a military strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear facility and stop Tehran from acquiring a functioning atomic plant, a former US envoy to the UN has said.

Iran is to bring online its first nuclear power reactor, built with Russia's help, on August 21, when a shipment of nuclear fuel will be loaded into the plant's core.

At that point, John Bolton warned Monday, it will be too late for Israel to launch a military strike against the facility because any attack would spread radiation and affect Iranian civilians.

"Once that uranium, once those fuel rods are very close to the reactor, certainly once they're in the reactor, attacking it means a release of radiation, no question about it," Bolton told Fox Business Network.

"So if Israel is going to do anything against Bushehr it has to move in the next eight days."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100817/wl_afp/irannuclearpoliticsisraelusmilitary_20100817120240

Bolton is too dense to understand that the Russian-supplied fuel for this power-generation reactor is under IAEA bond and inspection. It has nothing to do with uranium centrifuging underway elsewhere.

If I spot this loony-tard on the streets of New York, I'm gonna attempt a citizen's arrest. Wink

 

Johnny Oxygen's picture
Johnny Oxygen
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 9 2009
Posts: 1443
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Israel’s Crunch Time

http://frontpagemag.com/2010/08/17/decision-time-for-israel-on-bombing-iran/

The Obama administration gave Russia permission to deliver the fuel rods for Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactor in return for their support for U.N. sanctions. The Russians have announced they will begin the process on August 21 and Iran will begin operating the reactor in mid-September. In making this concession to Russia, the U.S. is forcing Israel to decide within one week if they will bomb the site before it is impossible to do so because of the radioactive fallout it would cause.

 

Sunni Arab regimes traditionally hostile to Israel have embraced the Jewish state as the only one able and willing to save them from a nuclear Iran and are silently supporting a potential campaign.

DrKrbyLuv's picture
DrKrbyLuv
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 10 2008
Posts: 1995
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

Johnny-O posted:

Sunni Arab regimes traditionally hostile to Israel have embraced the Jewish state as the only one able and willing to save them from a nuclear Iran and are silently supporting a potential campaign.

I wonder if Barack Hussein Obama's strong support of the ground zero mosque is not offered to provide the tyrants who run these arab states some cover.  And, people whisper that Barack Hussein Obama is secretly a muslim.  It's like grade B theater in my opinion to distract, divide and deceive the people.

Another very troubling aspect is that the media doesn't notice, is that one man, Obama, has the power to attack Iran without anyone's permission.  And since he has already shown that he is "sympathetic" (BS) to the Muslims, he will not be criticized by the left or right if he chooses to attack.  Tyranny is here.

When they deceived the public by fabricating evidence against Iraq at least some people asked....what will be the cost?  I think it was Rumsfield who suggested maybe $60 billion and others said "don't worry, Iraq's oil will help pay the bill once we democratize them."  Now, no one even bothers to ask how much, and more importantly, can we afford this war?

The United States government has had many dual Israeli / U.S citizens in high places, especially in this and the past administration.  Who are they more loyal to?  For example, Attorney General – Michael Mukasey, Head of Homeland Security – Michael Chertoff, Chairman Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Richard Perle (caught giving classified information to Israel back in 1970), Deputy Defense Secretary (Former) – Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of Defense – Douglas Feith, National Security Council Advisor – Elliott Abrams, Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff (Former) – “Scooter” Libby, White House Deputy Chief of Staff – Joshua Bolten, U.S. Trade Representative (Cabinet-level Position) – Robert Zoellick, Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – James Schlesinger, UN Representative (Former) – John Bolton and the list goes on and on.

Barry Soetoro's boss, Rahm Israel Emanuel, is a dual citizen and he even served in the Israeli military.  I suspect that if they were dual Iranian / American citizens, they would probably be war mongering against Israel for refusing to comply with U.N and IAEA inspection requirements while having an estimated 200 or so nukes.  And they would probably remind us that Israel tried to secretly sell nuclear weapons to Apartheid South Africa.  They would say "who else are they selling these weapons to...it must be stopped."

The whole thing stinks just like it did with Iraq.

Larry

agitating prop's picture
agitating prop
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: May 28 2009
Posts: 864
Re: Odds of US attacking Iran within the next 24 months?

The U.S economy revolves around defence contractors who blow things up and engineering firms like KBR who put 'em back together again with the help of 'soldiers', Blackwater mercenaries. An attack on Iran won't likely involve any attempt to rebuild the country afterwards. So the broken window theory of economic stimulus, (in this case the broken country theory)  could be limited to the simple broken window. It's driven by pure greed, purely malevolent war profiteering. It's pure punishment for Iran. It doesn't help that the emotional focal point of the conflict is a country that has so much pain in it's collective memory and abundant paranoia, as a consequence.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments