Update [2005-6-21 18:15:4 by susanhu]: Scott Ritter is on Tucker Carlson’s show on MSNBC now.
Just as the war against Iraq had already begun by early summer 2002, so has the war against Iran begun. It’s begun by “conditioning” the public, thanks to what Ray McGovern calls a “domesticated” media. It’s begun by what Scott Ritter alleges are Bush-ordered “covert offensive operations inside Iran.”
It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.
Although Ritter doesn’t explain, I assume he’s referring to the spate of deadly bombings before Iran’s national elections last week.
Ritter admonishes us not to be solely fixated on the failures of Iraq that are now history, but to look forward to what will happen next … and he warns us not to overlook the strategic importance of Azerbaijan. Rumsfeld hasn’t. Nor has journalist Chris Floyd … Below:
Winter Patriot notes:
This plan is now being activated.
There’s more from Chris Floyd here.
In his June 20 column in Al-Jazeera, Ritter points to the U.S. military build-up in Azebjaijan:
Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld’s interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan’s role in the upcoming war with Iran.
The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.
But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.
In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.
No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.
A much shorter route to Tehran now exists – the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.
US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.
Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.
Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003. …
Map courtesy of BBC News Country Profile of Azerbaijan.
“Most Americans [and] the mainstream American media,” writes Ritter, “are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.”
did everyone notice this stomach-turning story from the AP (June 19, 2005)? [Snipped and emphasis added]
Oh my.
Two for the price of one (country!). Pipeline + launching pad for war.
One thing that concerns me is the way in which groups like the National Endowment for Democracy, Liberty Institute, Eurasia Foundation, and George Soros’ Open Society Institute have been linked to the recent events in the Caucasus. I’m all for the Spread of Democracy(tm) but it’s obvious that the neocons are positioning themselves to control the oilfeilds. The Russians are getting pissed, and the Chinese are certainly keeping an eye over their south-western border.
I’m very conflicted about this. Certainly I have no wish to see dictators in control. But I just can’t trust the neocons to do the right thing. They’re hell-bent on global domination, it seems.
I fear that Central Asia will not be quiet for some long time to come.
“They’re hell-bent on global domination, it seems.”
They explicitly state it. :p
Amazing, as always. This is something we need to take very seriously.
I’m wondering how troop levels and low public support might play into this.
Massive shock-‘n’-awe bombing. Good news for Fox News ratings and no need for troops “on the ground,” which we don’t have to spare anyway.
This is the one that spirals out of control. Nice knowing all of you.
I just hope it goes quickly, so that whoever is left can get on with it…..
This is so disturbing, but not surprising in the least, unfortunately…
Bush’s biographer made it clear that George wanted from way back to be a war president. Now that oil prices are skyrocketing and the debt is out of control, continual war is his only possible hope to retain control.
Anyone want to bet on a strange coincidence between a sudden crisis with Iran and the 2006 congressional elections?
That the Bush Administration would orchestrate this so that Bush will be a ‘War President’ and a ‘Commander in Chief’ for the Republican party, that is puke worthy.
that’s not all that bad. Plus, look how Iraq has prospered with their shiny new Neoconomy! Azerbaijan seems ripe for similar “success.”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/19/204749/532
The question of who is being the street bombing has been asked and the same question is asked about the bombings in Lebanon. Speculation is “CIA/Israel.” Will we ever know for sure?
Sybil, I think you’re right about Lebanon. Another prominent Lebanese politician has been assassinated by car bomb…. in today’s news.
From Democracy Now!
Another Politician Killed in Lebanon
In Lebanon, there has been another apparent assassination of an anti-Syrian politician. George Hawi, a former leader of the Lebanese Communist Party, was killed on Tuesday when a bomb ripped through his car in Beirut, two days after parliamentary elections ended with victory to an alliance that opposed Damascus’s role in Lebanon. It was the second killing of an anti-Syrian figure in Beirut this month. Newspaper columnist Samir Kassir was killed on June 2 when a similar explosion destroyed his car.
Ritter gave that speech in February 2005.
He said then — in a speech in Olympia, WA (Evergreen State College) with journalist Dahr Jamail — that the Iran war would start this month. So far, the air campaign hasn’t begun, best we know.
So, Ritter’s February prediction is off. But maybe not by much…. plans do shift a bit as goals near.
In order to find out, we would have to connect with Iran blogs since there is no free press in Iran. I understand many bloggers in Iran have been shut down.
[slightly off topic]
Here’s a snip I found this morning about freedom of the press from Scoop:
In the Orwellian world of modern day journalism, where a new form of political correctness frames their every utterance, the language is contracting. Because the goal of totalitarian thought control is to make the expression of political incorrectness impossible, words are used, not to make debating points, but to end all discussion.
I could see this starting through an attack by Israel. In which case look for a carrier group positioning itself in the Eastern Mediterranean to cover their asses.
First major strikes would likely take place during the new moon. Next one is July 6th.
lol I just wrote a blog on this subject, didn’t see it front paged until I was about to post it. Good job Susan.
snipet:
I find it pretty ridiculous that we have an administration that is willing to support terrorism and torture as a means to eliminate terrorism and torture. What is the tipping point that the American people realize that the contempt for international law and human rights is in no way the proper means to some ideological ends.
You should post your diary … I’d like to read what you wrote. btw, someone on Kos posted this yesterday but it was all quotes.
About what you say above: I loved how Vanessa Redgrave addressed every question that Bob Costas threw at her on Larry King Live on Sat. night …. We must uphold the rule of law … we are a nation of laws…. it was interesting how she avoided getting into specifics and she didn’t bash Bush/Rumsfeld/Rice et al. She just calmly repeated that we must uphold our laws because we are nations with laws, that we believe in habeas corpus. That, she said, is her bottom line.
I didn’t catch that, I’ll look for the transcript. M
My diary was leaning more on the cut and paste tradition than a lot of analysis. I was trying to get it out there quickly, so I’m just glad this op-ed is getting attention.
Susan: someone on Kos posted this yesterday but it was all quotes.
Yes, and he was wrong about Ritter speaking in WA, this week-end as far as I can tell. But it is the comments that are interesting. Like this one by Lapin:
The U.S. Removes the Nuclear Brakes
Under the cloak of secrecy imparted by use of military code names, the American administration has been taking a big – and dangerous – step that will lead to the transformation of the nuclear bomb into a legitimate weapon for waging war.
Ever since the terror attack of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration has gradually done away with all the nuclear brakes that characterized American policy during the Cold War. No longer are nuclear bombs considered “the weapon of last resort.” No longer is the nuclear bomb the ultimate means of deterrence against nuclear powers, which the United States would never be the first to employ.
In the era of a single, ruthless superpower, whose leadership intends to shape the world according to its own forceful world view, nuclear weapons have become a attractive instrument for waging wars, even against enemies that do not possess nuclear arms.
Remember the code name “CONPLAN 8022.” Last week, the Washington Post reported that this unintelligible nickname masks a military program whose implementation could drag the world into nuclear war.
Not that I want to scare anyone.
Geez, I scared myself and now I won’t be able to eat breakfast.
The rest of the article you quoted above is here:
http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views05/0526-23.htm
Just a taste:
“Each detonation of a bomb a few meters underground would destroy most of the buildings on the surface to a range of two kilometers. After the explosion, there would be a need to quickly evacuate civilians from an area of 100 square kilometers, to avoid the deadly effects of the radioactive fallout; buildings, agricultural crops and livestock would be affected in an area of thousands of square kilometers, and depending on wind direction and velocity, there could be a need to evacuate more people from thousands of additional square kilometers.
None of this takes into account the political and psychological repercussions of using nuclear weapons for the first time in more than 60 years. The Bush administration regards all this as “limited collateral damage.”
Not a code name, simply mean Contingency Plan abbreviated to CONPLAN.
Doesn’t lessen the severity of its contents, though.
I’ll be curious to see just what kind of war this administration expects to fight in Iran.
Unless, they are going to invade Iran as way of withdrawing from Iraq, I have a hard time believing that this administration could find a way to do a yet another invasion and occupation. Besides, I found Riverbend’s latest post to offer an interesting view of how long the U.S. expects to be in Iraq.
So, if the U.S. is going to fight a war in Iran, I have to believe that they’ll try to use the Afghanistan model again. They’ll use groups like the MEK to seize key territory (primarily the oil areas around Ahvaz and Khorramshahr). The U.S. Special Forces will then go after the nuclear sites and leadership targets (possibly trying snatch and grab attacks on senior leaders). Their hope would be to spark a “democratic” revolution that would eliminate the existing clerical hold on power in Iran and leave them in a situation to dictate the replacement.
Of course, such a plan would be doomed to failure. If you have been reading Juan Cole’s latest missives, you’d realize that BushCo’s actions have actually INCREASED support for the Islamic regime in Iran. Iranians believe the U.S. is out to get them and they are UNITED in their determination to develop nuclear power (and possibly nuclear weapons). In the event of ANY U.S. attack on Iran, the current corrupt Islamic leadership of Iran will get a powerful new lease on life.
That makes for chilling reading–how the occupying forces are building their own fancy city in the Green Zone all surrounded by huge concrete walls.
Camp Bondsteel built by the U.S. military is quite the concrete reinforced sprawl.
Check out the pictures at John Pike’s site Global Security.
… a state sponsor of terrorism (I know, nothing really new about this). Maybe the British should invade us.
Asfor BushCo, don’t just impeach the bastards, prosecute them in the international criminal court or a military tribunal.