Buck Naked Politics

John Bolton's Call for Israel to "Help" Moderate Iranians -- by Bombing Iran

by Damozel | Here's some neocon "logic" for you:

Iran's nuclear threat was never in doubt during its presidential campaign, but the post-election resistance raised the possibility of some sort of regime change. That prospect seems lost for the near future or for at least as long as it will take Iran to finalize a deliverable nuclear weapons capability.

Accordingly, with no other timely option, the already compelling logic for an Israeli strike is nearly inexorable. Israel is undoubtedly ratcheting forward its decision-making process....With regime change off the table for the coming critical period in Iran's nuclear program, Israel's decision on using force is both easier and more urgent. Since there is no likelihood that diplomacy will start or finish in time, or even progress far enough to make any real difference, there is no point waiting for negotiations to play out.  (John R. Bolton in WaPo)

Here's the best bit:

Obama Tells Israel's Netanhayu that He Has a Timetable for Iran; CIA Chief Leon Panetta Finds Airstrikes Against Al Qaeda in Pakistan "Very Effective"

by Damozel | Obama told Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the US isn't prepared to jolly Iran along forever if Iran won't end its nuclear program. (NYT)  Israel wants the "unwavering support" it got from George W. Bush.  I'm sure it does.  Sadly for Israel, the American people -- i.e., the people who pick the president -- no longer have unwavering faith that Israel is always right or will always do the right thing. See the video here.

Obama, as usual, temporizes. 

“We’re not going to have talks forever,” Mr. Obama told Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel after a two-hour session in the Oval Office.

The president added that he did not intend to foreclose “a range of steps” if Iran did not cooperate....

Is Israel About to Bomb Iran's Nuclear Sites?

  by Damozel | The Times Online seems to think that Israel is, and indeed we've been hearing threats of impending action since last summer.  I find this all too easy to believe, but after what I've heard about its attacks on the Palestinians, I am prepared to believe anything.  M.J. Rosenberg at TPM doesn't believe it.  "Too utterly insane," he says.  Really?  I seem to recall quite a lot of talk about the possibility last summer (see related posts below) and the rhetoric hasn't changed. 

Here's what Sheera Frankel reports from Jerusalem. 

“Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours. They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” one senior defence official told The Times.

Eleven Arrested for conspiring to Export Munitions to Iran?

 by Deb Cupples |  It's amazing that it was even possible for such a thing to happen.  The Justice Department reports:

"An Iranian national has been arrested and charged, along with ten other defendants, with participating in a conspiracy to export U.S.-made military aircraft parts to Iran....

"Baktash Fattahi and ten other defendants were indicted on April 2, 2009, by a federal grand jury sitting in Miami on charges of conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the U.S. Iran Embargo, and the Arms Export Control Act for their participation in a conspiracy to export U.S.-made military aircraft parts to Iran."

Army Charity Fails to Help as Many Soldiers as it Could've?

 by Deb Cupples |  Many of our enlisted-rank troops are already underpaid, thanks in part to the Bush Administration.  Many of them need extra money to take care of their families.  Where do some of them turn for help?  The Army Emergency Relief (AER) fund.

Oddly, Army superiors have been known to pressure our already-underpaid troops for donations -- which sounds a bit like asking starving-homeless people to donate food to the poor.

When those already-underpaid soldiers need help, it often comes from the AER in the form of a loan.  Even worse, the AER has reportedly hoarded millions of dollars in funds, despite the neediness of many of our troops.  The Associated Press reports:

Did Bush Admin. Mislead us About Iranian Arms in Iraq?

 by D. Cupples |   If so, it wouldn't be the first time that Administration folks misled us taxpayers about an important issue.  The American Prospect reports:

"In the worst days of the Iraq War, the Pentagon launched a media campaign designed to convince the world that Iran was smuggling arms to Iraqi insurgents. Some of the claims strained credulity, such as the idea that Iran would supply Sunni insurgents fighting against its Shia allies. In particular, Iran was supposed to be the main supplier of deadly EFPs, or explosively formed projectiles. To some, these claims were alarming evidence of malevolent Iranian intentions. To others, they were a transparent effort to blame US failure on Iran."

US Helicopters Attack Syrian Village, 8 Alleged Dead

by Damozel | So says the Syrian News.  From HuffPost:

The Syrian report comes just days after the commander of U.S. forces in western Iraq told reporters that American troops were redoubling efforts to secure the Syrian border, which he said was an "uncontrolled" gateway for fighters entering Iraq.

A government statement carried by the official Syrian Arab News Agency said Sunday's attack was on the Sukkariyeh Farm near the town of Abu Kamal, five miles inside the Syrian border. Four helicopters attacked a civilian building under construction, firing on the workers inside, shortly before sundown, the statement said.

The U.S. military in Baghdad did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The area is near the Iraqi border city of Qaim, which had been a major crossing point for fighters, weapons and money coming into Iraq to fuel the Sunni insurgency.

Meanwhile, Bush Administration Commits to Firmer Deadlines for Withdrawal from Iraq; Also: A Note on Afghanistan

by Damozel | Did you know that George W. Bush is still president?  It's true.  And while you were arguing about the next election, he's been a busy president!  That agreement with Iraq?  The negotiators have completed their work, though there is still "the ponderous process" of Iraqi ratification to get through.

The Administration has made some concessions to "the sensitivities of the Iraqi government" that The New York Times notes would have been "unimaginable" a few months back.  First, there's the matter of withdrawal dates.  Is the Bush Administration waving what Governor Palin called "a white flag of surrender"?  You be the judge!  The New York Times reports:

Admiral Fallon Discusses US foreign policy on BBC's Newsnight

Posted by Damozel | Highly recommended.

Fallon is the CENTCOM Chief who resigned last year. 

Fallon opposed the “surge” in Iraq and...consistently battled the Bush administration to avoid a confrontation with Iran, calling officials’ warmongering rhetoric “not helpful.”  (Think Progress)

Whatever he may have thought before, he says that the situation in Iraq generally is greatly improved. He also discusses troop withdrawals, Iran, and his own role in US foreign policy.   At any rate, it's an interesting interview by a serious interviewer; and Fallon makes an excellent showing.

Seymour Hersh: Dick Cheney's Plan for Provoking War with Iran

Did administration officials actually meet to work out how they could go about provoking a war with Iran?  Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh says that they did.

In Hersh’s most recent article, he reports that this meeting occurred in the wake of the overblown incident in the Strait of Hormuz, when a U.S. carrier almost shot at a few small Iranian speedboats. The “meeting took place in the Vice-President’s office. ‘The subject was how to create a casus belli between Tehran and Washington,’” according to one of Hersh’s sources. (Think Progress)

Rice Issues Warning to Iran; Drumbeats Grow Louder

by Damozel | Iran has said that it tested missiles again and Condi rejoined that we would defend our allies, i.e., Israel, if they are attacked. (NYT)  It's seemed quite clear to me all along that Israel is determined that if Iran doesn't capitulate --- which Iran says it will not --- that Israel is determined to strike. 

So it seems a transparent piece of double-speak for Rice to talk about "defense."  Isn't this what she's really saying:  "If Iran doesn't either do what Israel and a number of other countries tell it to do, and Israel strikes, Iran must submit to the attack or we'll come in on Israel's side? "

Tracking the Course of the Bush-Cheney Juggernaut As It Lurches Toward Iran

by Damozel | As I noted yesterday, the Iranians have announced that their policy on uranium enrichment remains unchanged despite attempts by several nations to persuade them to cease and desist.

Barring a complete capitulation by the Iranians, which no one really believes is on the cards, is it possible that Bush and Cheney will leave office without opening a third military front in Iran? Is there really any doubt that Bush fully expects the diplomatic efforts to persuade Iran to comply with the demands of the US and Israel to fail? And that when the failure inevitably occurs, he is highly or at least quite likely to take or enable military action?

Bear in mind that I'm just a simple citizeness trying to piece together the signs in the media so I at least know what direction we'€™re rolling in. I don’t have any specialist knowledge in international law or military defense. I'm not about to get into a fight with anyone about which country is most in the wrong here.

Iran's Position Unchanged Despite Offered Incentives Package

by Damozel | The other day I posted a piece about a recent EU (plus China and Russia) negotation with Iran.  Lots of incentives were promised....if only Iran would stop its uranium enrichment program (BN-Politics).

The Iranians have returned a reply. 

In the first official comments since Iran submitted its response to the EU, spokesman Gholamhossein Elham said that Iran "will not go back on its rights on the nuclear issue". "Iran's stand regarding its peaceful nuclear program has not changed. Iran insists on negotiations while respecting its rights and avoiding any loss of international rights," BBC News)

I guess that means 'no,' huh?

Chairman of Joint Chiefs Recommends a Cautious Approach in Iran; Other Nations Try for Diplomatic Solutions

by Damozel | Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen has stated that a strike against Iran would be 'extremely stressful' for the US.  I'll say it would --- though of course, he's talking about a different sort of stress.

As BBC News' Justin Webb notes, it seems clear that Mullen does not want an attack on Iran at this time, and is fighting hard behind the scenes to prevent it. While he believes that Iran 'is on a path to get nuclear weapons and...that's something that needs to be deterred,' he thinks that 'the solution still lies in using other elements of national power to change Iranian behaviour, including diplomatic, financial and international pressure."' (BBC News)   Like almost everyone, he wants a dialogue between the US and Tehran. 

Bush Administration's Covert Actions re: Iran

by  Deb Cupples |   Seymore Hersh has a scary story about the Bush Administration's secret attempts to de-stabilize Iran. Hersh begins:

"Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership.

"The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations. They also include...

Is Israel Gearing Up for an Attack Against Iran?

by Damozel | More than 100 F-16 and F-15 fighters participated in an exercise over the eastern Mediterranean and Greece, according to this report in The International Herald Tribune.  Israeli officials just said that Israel regularly carries out military exercises.(IHT)   But 'a senior Pentagon official', speaking on condition of anonymity, said that the exercise served more than one purpose, and that preparing for a strike against Iran was one of them.

One Israeli goal, the Pentagon official said, was to practice flight tactics, aerial refueling and all other details of a possible strike against Iran's nuclear installations and its long-range conventional missiles.

Is Iran the New Iraq: i.e., Does Bush Plan to Attack?

by Deb Cupples |   By now, we Americans know what it looks like when a president makes a case (however questionable) for war.  It's been obvious for at least the last year that the Bush Administration has been interested in taking some sort of military action against Iran. 

The interest has been there for years.  In 2002, President Bush used the embarrassingly comic-book-ish phrase "Axis of Evil" when talking about Iran. (White House)  It doesn't get much clearer than that.  Last year, Bush Administration officials and allies (e.g., Sen. Joe Lieberman) publicly talked of an attack against Iran.  And yet, yesterday, the Bush Administration publicly denied any interest in attacking that nation.  The Jerusalem Post reports:

Is the Bush Administration Planning an Attack Inside Iran's Borders?

Posted by Damozel | Did you know that George W. Bush a/k/a 'Richard Cheney' is still commander-in-chief of the US Armed Forces?  It's true.  Will it surprise you to learn that he -- or rather 'they' --- are gearing up for a military strike in Iraq?

The US military is drawing up plans for a “surgical strike” against an insurgent training camp inside Iran if Republican Guards continue with attempts to destabilise Iraq, western intelligence sources said last week. One source said the Americans were growing increasingly angry at the involvement of the Guards’ special-operations Quds force inside Iraq, training Shi’ite militias and smuggling weapons into the country.  (ToL)

By 'the Americans', the aforementioned 'source' meant 'the Bush Administration,' of course, and by 'the Bush Administration,' specifically --- or, rather, especially --- frustrated puppet-master-in-chief Richard Cheney.

Joint Chiefs Tell Iran to Knock it Off...or Else

Posted by Damozel | Did you know that George W. Bush is still president?  It's true.  And yesterday, 'a second American aircraft carrier steamed into the Persian Gulf on Tuesday as the Pentagon ordered military commanders to develop new options for attacking Iran.' (CBS News)

One concern is the Iranians' participation in the Iraq war.  '"What the Iranians are doing is killing American servicemen and -women inside Iraq," said Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.'   They are certainly smuggling weapons into Iraq. (CBS News)   Current reports state that they are increasing aid to Iraqi militias.(CBS News)  The military claims to have evidence of this:

Iran vs. Israel: Criticism from Al-Qaeda and Some Preemptive Bellicosity from Clinton

Posted by Damozel | Al-Qaeda's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is upset with Iran for propagating the rumor that Israel was behind 9-11.  Al-Qaeda wants full credit for it. 

In an audio tape posted on the internet, Zawahiri insisted al-Qaeda had carried out the attacks on the US.

He accused Iran, and its Hezbollah allies, of trying to discredit Osama Bin Laden's network.

Correspondents say the comments underline al-Qaeda's increasing public hostility towards Iran.  "The purpose of this lie is clear - [to suggest] that there are no heroes among the Sunnis who can hurt America as no-one else did in history, he said.  "Iranian media snapped up this lie and repeated it." (BBC News)