Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
July 21, 2017 Disclaimer: Please read.

Statements and opinions expressed in articles are those of the authors, not Truthdig. Truthdig takes no responsibility for such statements or opinions.

The Life of Caliph Washington

Truthdig Bazaar

Mekong Diaries

By Sherry Buchanan

more items

Email this item Print this item

Iraq Will Have to Wait

Posted on Sep 27, 2007
Cheney and fighter jet
AP photo / Gerald Herbert

Vice President Dick Cheney struts in front of an F/A-18 fighter jet aboard the USS John C. Stennis aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf. The Stennis is part of a carrier group sent to the region in order to intimidate, and perhaps bombard, Iran.

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.

Square, Story page, 2nd paragraph, mobile
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.”  His remarks were built on assertions he first set forth in February 2007 when he highlighted his assessment of Iranian involvement inside Iraq.  At that time the president declared, “I can say with certainty that the Quds Force, a part of the Iranian government, has provided these sophisticated IEDs [improvised explosive devices] that have harmed our troops.”  Bush avoided direct implication of the Iranian regime, stating, ” ... I do not know whether or not the Quds Force was ordered from the top echelons of the government. But my point is, what’s worse—them ordering it and it happening, or them not ordering it and it happening?”  I might suggest that the American president putting the weight of the United States behind unsubstantiated speculation in order to build a case for war might, in fact, be worse, but since he got away with it regarding Iraqi WMD, why stop now?


Square, Site wide, Desktop


Square, Site wide, Mobile

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Join the conversation

Load Comments

By campaign signs, March 7, 2008 at 5:34 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I am just glad that the elections are around the corner, and I am hoping that the new candidate will have better sense. There are more important things to focus on like the rising inflation rate and gas prices in the country.
I guess at the moment we just don’t have the luxury to go out and help other nations. As sad as that is, its true.
We need to pull back our troops, bring them back to their families and certainly avoid the the war in Iran.

Report this

By T. R. Hoopingarner, October 13, 2007 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What the hell is this government thinking?  The Iraq war is a total disaster and for reasons still to ambiguous to even consider.

Now, let’s just start another war in Iran.  What a good idea?

I’ve always found it fastenating that the people that are completely incompetent and gutless have no problems with sending young men and women to fight a war in order to make a very few people extremely wealthy.

I am sick of political liars playing the big “fear” card.  What a crock!

How many more Constitutional Rights are we going to lose before people step up and say NO WAY!

Report this

By prosefights, October 5, 2007 at 6:35 pm Link to this comment

US marshal attempted intimidation.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, October 5, 2007 at 8:11 am Link to this comment

#104657 by SaraB on 10/04 at 9:55 am: “...What can be done? How can it be done? (Legally and peacefully of course…”

Its no longer quite just “a matter of course”, SaraB. Since Gonzales, nothing in the legal system is just any more (it never was, anyway). And what are you going to do if some pig wants to Taser you? Don’t tell me you would just let them?!?!

In the end, all thought of FREEDOM will be usurped, subsumed or suppressed. That is, what ever is “legal” will be waht you are told you may or may not do according to the state. That is neither justice or law.

Quote IMDb - “1984” the movie: “...The Ministry of Truth broadcasts ceaselessly to the population via its inescapable network of telescreens. These devices, which pervade all aspects of peoples’ lives, are also capable of monitoring their every word and action. They form part of an elaborate surveillance system used by the Ministry of Love, and its dreaded agents the Thought Police, to serve their singular goal: the elimination of ‘thoughtcrime’......

Winston Smith is a Party worker - part of the vast social caste known as the Outer Party, the rank and file of the sprawling apparatus of government. Winston works in the Records Department of the Ministry of Truth - the section charged with modifying historical news archives for consistency. When by chance Winston uncovers incontrovertible proof that the Party is lying, he embarks on a journey of self-questioning. In doing so, he becomes a thought-criminal…....”.

Explore deeper the blur between propaganda and reality…. but be prepared to act in your own defence as best you can - not just “as permitted”. Legal = sheep!

As TAOWalker says “We have nothing to lose here….nothing to fear…” So, “by virtue of your humanity”, you do have the right to live by the laws of Creation - not merely foolish mans’ laws. Let your Intuition be your only guide!

Report this

By TAO Walker, October 5, 2007 at 1:13 am Link to this comment

Just BE, SaraB (#104657).  Our “act” as free wild Human Beings is simply fulfilling our organic function within the living body of our Mother Earth.  Our organic Human form is what the Lakota People call Tiyoshpaye (Speakers of English are stuck with the badly debased “community,” used almost exclusively, here in these latter days, in reference to various more-or-less random collections of equally degraded “civilized individuals.”).

Beyond both thought and words we “go” where the boundless currents of LifeHerownself carry us.  We have nothing to lose here….nothing to fear.  Whenever and wherever there is something we can DO, it will be self-evident at the time and in the place, and no occasion for agonizing doubt. 

Look to those with whom you’re already connected, by virtue of your humanity, to discover the Tiyoshpaye you belong to.  Most of its “members” are not even Two-Leggeds….lucky for All-concerned.

The fear-mongers’ latest reign-of-terror is going to run its inevitable course here.  Our tormentors’ ten-thousand-year-long attempt to tyrannize Our Mother Earth and all her natural Children, including us Ickche Wichasha, is about at the end of their rope.

So attend conscientiously to what each day brings to your hands and heart.  Trust in your Sisters and Brothers and All Our Relations everywhere to be doing the same wherever they are.


As a young man this old Heathen Savage was also wondering out-loud one time pretty much what SaraB is here.  GreatGrandMother gave this Person that day what’s written above, in response. 

May her hard-won wisdom help others as much as it has this Wild Child….over a long and eventful life.


Report this

By prosefights, October 4, 2007 at 4:36 pm Link to this comment

Complaint of telephone harassment file with Elisha of telephone company at 1-866-834-7837 at about 17:10.

Payne sent second email and spoke with Lt Martagon again. Ms Carmago is gone for the day.

Martagon advised that if Payne fears for his safety, then he should phone APD.

Email sent. Payne spoke briefly to Lt Martagon.

Keep in mind readers. The guys we’re dealing with are dangerous. Killers. Nazis. But this time they are using Iranians and Iraqis for their jews. And feds may be just getting started with the Iraq/Iran war and two invasions of Iraq.

Thursday October 4, 2007 16:48


I am sending a second copy. We think this could be serious.

I am about ready to phone APD.

Colonel Feehan c/o
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Let me repeat what I said on the phone.

We are concern for our personal safety as a result of judge Armijo and Garcia’s illegal actions.

All background material is included in below link.

The Air Force should be help us provide a Safe Harbor while these matters are being settled.

I am getting strange phone calls with only one ring.

bill payne and art morales


.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
McClenaghan c/o .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Report this

By cyrena, October 4, 2007 at 11:40 am Link to this comment

•  #103644 by Enemy of State on 9/30 at 12:16 pm
(Cyrena, Deborah: one of the few positives from the Bush lunacy, I a mid fifties white man, now have more trust of black Americans than of my own race. Why? Because most American blacks have instinctively known that Bush was their enemy, they weren’t about to swallow his BS.
Well EOS,
Thanks for the acknowledgement, but I’ve gotta tell you, I think it just depends on ‘which’ black folks we’re talking about. Most of the ones I know, (friends and family included) are pretty much duped themselves. That is particularly the case wherever the Church might be. That’s why MLK is pitching fits in his grave. Back in the 60’s, most black folks didn’t swallow these lies. But now, many have been cowed into the BS, just like all of the others.
And no, I’m not saying that we ALL think that way, (as you see…many of us are ‘clued in’ as I have been for a long time. But, I’m just not sure how “instinctive” it is any longer. The media has mass manipulated so many. Oprah hasn’t helped.
So, I’m not sure that we all get it. Every time a kid, a sibling, or any loved one starts in on any one of the “celebs”, I feel inclined to just wop them right over the head.
What a backward state we’ve reached. I remember my dad never wanted us to watch cartoons. He didn’t like the Fantasy nature of them, (characters living millions of lives, falling off of mountain cliffs, and springing right back into action, that sort of thing) Just didn’t want us to think there was anything “real” about that.
NOW, I have to run around here like a mad woman, making sure nobody watches Oprah or the mainstream news media, because it’s all lies and non-reality. How crazy is that?

BUT, they can also catch the occasional glimpse of GW flipping off the entire country. Now THAT becomes a very realistic “clue” to how he feels about all of us.

But yeah, we definitely knew that Regan was no friend, and the first Shrub was no better, and Cheney…well. We’re talking number one racist of the 2 centuries. THAT we’ve always known, but still…not everybody.

Report this

By SaraB, October 4, 2007 at 10:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Thought precedes the word. Word precedes the action. Immense thought and and deeply considered words will change nothing if they are not followed by the right actions. What can be done? How can it be done? (Legally and peacefully of course.) Where do we go beyond words?

Report this

By prosefights, October 3, 2007 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

Let’s see what happens.

Report this

By Sabyl Riverwish, October 3, 2007 at 9:57 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The only tolerable bush is the burning bush!

Report this

By doris, October 2, 2007 at 1:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Scott believes the Official version, of 9-11-01 - which means he believes the BushCo lies !  So is he passing on lies now ?

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, October 1, 2007 at 12:51 pm Link to this comment

#103815 by JimBob on 10/01 at 11:33 am: “See, I told you, no one would give a shit about the 140 million

November is a potential date if they are serious and politics is their main game plan. One reason is that, with so little support around the world, the last vestiges of the “coalition of the willing” from Gulf War 2 will disappear after the Australian federal election. That must be held by early December and the Neocon Bush poodle John Howard will be conclusively defeated.

Report this
JimBob's avatar

By JimBob, October 1, 2007 at 12:33 pm Link to this comment

President Bush and Vice President Cheney are sitting
in a bar.
A guy walks in and asks the barman, “Isn’t that Bush
and Cheney sitting over there?”
The bartender says, “Yep, that’s them.”
So the guy walks over and says, “Wow, this is a real
honor! What are you guys doing in here?”
Bush says, “We’re planning WW III.”
The guy says, “No shit! Really? What’s going to
Bush says, “Well, we’re going to kill 140 million
Muslims and one blonde with humongous tits.”
The guy exclaimed, “A blonde with big tits? Why kill
a blonde with big tits?”
Bush turns to Cheney and says, “See, I told you, no
one would give a shit about the 140 million

Report this

By John Borowski, October 1, 2007 at 11:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’m praying for eternal peace. The pope has been praying for peace for two thousand years and he hasn’t given up yet. Why should I give up? I fear that if my prayers were answered it could drive society stark raving mad. I believe that most people reject this view because without hope, there is no hope.

Report this

By Enemy of State, September 30, 2007 at 1:16 pm Link to this comment

Cyrena, Deborah: one of the few positives from the Bush lunacy, I a mid fifties white man, now have more trust of black Americans than of my own race. Why? Because most American blacks have instinctively known that Bush was their enemy, they weren’t about to swallow his BS.

  Unfortunetley a lot of Americans are so easily manipulated by the Republicans clever use of patriotic, and psychological symbols. The things Bush says may be about as correct as the things Ahmadinejad says, but he is the President (and one who claims to be a Christian) so respect for the office means we have to assume everything he says is ture and good! Then we have the clever use of the Cult of The Warrior (playing on our quilt about the less than 1% of our population trapped into fighting these wars), to characterise anyone who questions Petraeous as a blasphemous traitor. Even the Democrats in congress (and the press) feel they must go along with this sack of #@$%. We seem to be throroughly screwed, as nearly all who criticise can be smeared as traitors.

Report this

By cann4ing, September 30, 2007 at 10:19 am Link to this comment

There are two questions that are somewhat overlooked by Scott Ritter.  The first involves the degree to which the corporate media is again serving as a megaphone for the administration’s propaganda.  During the recent 60 Minutes interview, Ahmadinejad was repeatedly challenged with the interviewer assuming every Bush administration claim about Iranian interference in our imperial war of aggression in Iraq was an established fact.  As in the run-up to the war in Iraq, issues such as the fact that the level of uranium enrichment in Iran is far below that required to produce a nuclear bomb (“Mushroom clouds” and yellow cake from Niger anyone?) are overlooked, as the supposed “danger” posed by the Ahmadinejad regime has become the mantra of the corporate media.

The second issue overlooked is far more troubling.  While all of us busy ourselves examining which candidates are actually willing to end the folly of imperial conquest of the Middle East (Clinton/Obama/Edwards all indicating we will still have forces in Iraq in 2013), Paul Craig Roberts, a former assistant secretary of the treasury in the Reagan administration, has been publishing articles, warning the nation that the executive orders are in place that would permit the Bush regime to use a new “terrorist incident” on U.S. soil as an excuse to declare a “national emergency,” as a forerunner to marshall law, perhaps a suspension of elections, Congress and the few shards of the constitution that still remain.  A pre-emptive strike on Iran could be but the first step in that scenario.  Roberts warns that most Americans have failed to grasp the extent of Cheney’s ruthlessness.

While I do not know whether circumstances are as potentially grave as Mr. Roberts’s believes they are, I do know that the cowardice displayed by the majority of Congressional Democrats, most recently entailing the Senate vote on the issue of Iran, can only serve to embolden the war criminals who now occupy the White House to carry out a final destruction of our constitutional democracy, lest they face the prospect of being held accountable under the rule of law once leaving office.

Report this

By purplewolf, September 30, 2007 at 2:30 am Link to this comment

George Bush is doing a repeat of what was once done to the first peoples(Native American)when the Eurotrash invaded this country.They came in and forceably stole the land here and still are to this day whenever anything that might be valuable on Indian land the goverment comes in and steals it.My girlfriend has refered to the Iraq debacle as the new updated version of “Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee” only it is now known as “Bury My Heart At Baghdad”. We here in Indian country refered to it as the American Holocaust.

Not everyone fell for the lies that spouted forth from the burning bushs mouth.This person was not to be trusted from well before he was handed the election.George Bush made it clear on the campaign trail in 2000 around July,that his top priority was to go to war in Iraq and after Sadam,and that was before he was president.It was on the news and in the newspapers before all of his censorship started and now we have a newspaper so small every day that it wouldn’t even make a good kleenex.

Don’t worry the American people unarmed.In this nation of about 300 million people,at least 95 million of use are lawful gun owners and those 95 million gun owners lawfully possess 212 million+ firearms.This does not take into account all of the illegal gun owners and their weapons.Now if the goverment were to recall all military members from around the entire world,they would have a force of only about 2 million.95 million gun owners to 2 million troops equals 47.5 to 1.True they have more modern weapons than the average gun owner,but they are grossly outnumbered,and if you take in the fact that all these goverment guns would not be able to land on Americas shoreline for quite sometime-just look at the troop withdrawals now.And if only 10 % of the 95 million gun owners stood up to fight,they still outnumber the military and many of our military may decide not to turn against their country and the people in it.Don’t forget all of those illegal gun owners too.

My main concern,as many others is to try to derail that runaway train wreck on the B+C railroad.Congress seems to have been mesmerized as to the reality of this dire situation.They should have impeached Cheney then Bush in that order as Cheney is the director in this insane scheme and has been since the earlt 1970’s.

It is sheer madness to even think about attacking Iran.Are there that many paid killers at a $1000/day that they can use to fight this war since they have run out of military here to recall back at home.They need to recall Bush into active duty since he didn’t serve the first time around.It would do him good,a real first hand knowledge of what it is really like to take over the world with real live action figures instead of that stupid board game he forced other students to play in college and then kept changing the rules so he would win-just like today. But wait, the world isn’t playing by Goergie’s rules Well if he wants to be ruler of the world-let him do it over there on the ground,after all it is his war-not the people that have been brainwashed into believing they are keeping us free at home and all the while our rights have been taken away by G.W.

And as for keeping us safe here in America-how does G.W. figure that when all our military is everywhere but here.Besides he always tells us to not be dependent upon goverment.Guess we will all have to protect ourselves then.

Report this

By don knutsen, September 29, 2007 at 9:32 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

An excert from Scott Ridder’s most excellant article on the subject…..worth repeating..We should all be centering on this topic at this time, before the enevitability of this war making administration has its way again.  This is not a partisan issue….

The highest priority for the antiwar movement in America today must be the prevention of a war with Iran.  The strategic objectives should include getting Congress to repeal the war-powers authorities currently on the books, thereby forcing the president to seek new congressional approval for any new war.

Report this

By William Ries, September 29, 2007 at 9:22 pm Link to this comment

I knew George Bush was the anti christ!  Just didn’t trust my gut feeling to espouse that to the whole world until I found truth dig.  Keep up the good work, Scott Ritter.  I feel the need to go to an anti war protest.

Report this

By ocjim, September 29, 2007 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment

I have nothing but disgust for George W. Bush and the members of Congress who enable him. The situation in Iraq is probably the worst manifestation of their lack of humanity. All have blood on their hands. All are culpable in the huge suffering that they oversee in Iraq. Their unwillingness to take in Iraqi refugees in danger is just another sign of an almost sociopathic disregard for human beings, especially since they are responsible for the vast waste wrought by this unnecessary war. To politicize over this anguish and suffering is unpardonable, whether you are running for president or you happen to occupy that position.

Report this

By cyrena, September 29, 2007 at 3:25 pm Link to this comment


•  So yes, Americans are paying attention. I am one simple American black woman, mid-30’s, helping to support a family. I’m trying to do what so many Iraqi’s are trying to do: Stay alive.

You were quoting me (about American’s not seeming concerned) in your very excellent comments.  And, I too, am an American black woman, just a couple of decades older, but trying to do the same thing as you and the Iraqis…STAY ALIVE.

And, I’m overwhelmingly delighted to know that you are indeed paying attention, as we should “assume” from anyone who reads and posts to this site. My own reference was to the obviously larger portion of Americans who STILL DON’T GET IT.

And, when I put that out there, the question in the minds of many Americans who DO pay attention, I stipulated that I believed it to be a perfectly valid and legitimate observation by another informed American. I will re-state. “How/why would the US instigate a conflict with Iran, when we are already bogged down in all of these other conflicts, and we have no troops, including the troops that would need to be here in the event of ANY sort of disaster that we might need them for, here at home.

I thought this was a logical question, and I attempted to answer it by saying that the very long planned attack on Iran, was not intended to be what the US created in Iraq. They never anticipated any response from the Iraqis when they illegally invaded and occupied that nation. Iraq severely weakened in from its wars with it’s own neighbors, as well as the brutal sanctions that had been imposed by the US.

So, the neocon mob that planned this whole thing, (Iraq, Iran, Syria) back when you were in your early 20’s, never anticipated the reaction from Iraqis who didn’t want to be conquered, occupied, and have all of their natural resources stolen.

However, the question that was posed –to me- regarding the next planned attack –on Iran- was a pragmatic one, that I attempted to answer by explaining exactly what I explained. The attack on Iran will be (unless we can somehow prevent it) an AIR attack, which does not require the amount of ground forces that there was never “enough of” in Iraq. I say that in the same breath as saying that we should never have sent a single solitary soldier/marine/airman/navy seaman to Iraq in the first place! Afghanistan either, as far as I’m concerned; at least now. At the time, I believed the Afghanistan action was acceptable in a limited fashion, because we were originally tricked into believing that Afghanistan had somehow sponsored the alleged “terrorists” that attacked us on 9-11. I know longer even believe that, because I’m still not sure who was responsible for 9-11. There has been –zero- conclusive proof or evidence that the Taliban or any other Arabs were involved. But, we KNOW that Iraq was NOT.
So, I’m very pleased to know that you, (and more and more Americans) are indeed paying attention. I’m sorry to know that you’ve experienced the same frustration in watching what I have previously referenced as a wakeful nightmare of the on-going slow motion train-wreck of Iraq. It has caused me the same incredible distress, since I was one of the many leftovers from an earlier time, who protested vehemently BEOFRE the Iraq invasion. Please allow me to say however, that it has been only in the past couple of years, that many Americans finally started to see the “light” and there are still many who do not. In many cases, it is an understandable case of “denial” As I mentioned in a previous post, how do you tell a loved one that THEIR loved ones have been killed or wounded, because they were sent to steal oil?

The Iraqis know that’s why so many of THEM have perished, so ALL Americans should be equally aware.

Your essay has indicated that we’re getting there. Keep spreading the word.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 29, 2007 at 11:16 am Link to this comment

#103446 by omop on 9/29 at 9:50 am: “...By not bombing or nuking Iran as requested initially by Israel GWB may have added to the undercurrent of whispers that 300 million Americans that make up the US of A may all actually be “closet antisemites”....”

Well, that is not such a bad thing if it means not being led by your nose - but Americans are still blindsided by saluting their own flag and doing whatever they are told in the name of their “fearless leader” and commander of the armed forces, uhh. That is the 1800’s civil war fantasies still in the US blood as some kind of illusory “glory”. It is madness!

Bush’s great achievement was bombing the remote uninhabited mountains of Afghanistan. That used up munitions and kept the troops or at least the airforce occupied. The industrial complex supporting the military was happy and there was little unemployment. Putting troops on the ground in Iraq was another matter as they tend to get killed or injured, as you and Non Credo say, ‘omop’.

Now that Israel is desperate that they are stuck with the mess over there, they will want to resort to their own WMD’s.  Bush doesn’t have to do a thing except let conditions continue to deteriorate. That is said to be clever statescraft. In these days of nuclear weapons, it is sheer madness! Having that French (he’s actually a Hungarian!) wanker, Sarkosy, on side and strutting about adds to the risk as they have WMD’s thye want to use, too.

Report this

By omop, September 29, 2007 at 10:50 am Link to this comment

One of two or both unmentionable possibilities could take place if the present agitation to nuke Iran does not take place as planned for in the infamous Bebe Netanyahu “Clear Break” (co-wrote along with 3 American neocons and 3 israelis in the mid 1990s).

a) The impression that by not being able to tell the difference between the letters N or Q GWB did not do as he was told to do in Netanyahu’s “Clear Break” plan and that Israel is not responsible for the mess in Iraq. Since they were quite specific in writing “get Iran first, then Iraq second,  Syria third”.

    Therefore if no effort is made by GWB to rectify this blunder. His reference in history books will always include the notation of his not being able to tell N from Q or K.

b)  By not bombing or nuking Iran as requested initially by Israel GWB may have added to the undercurrent of whispers that 300 million Americans that make up the US of A may all actually be “closet antisemites”.

So after the loss of close to 4000 US lives and the crippling for life of a further 66,000 young american men and women not to mention the thousands of iraqi men, women and children dead and the millions in refugees in addition to the 720 million dollars costs of being welcomed in Iraq. The GWB team is on the spot.

And the USA is at a crossroad which it was suckered into through the beliefs of Donald Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Pies, etc,. when it was initially sold as a “cakewalk” and in respone as to how long the “cakewalk” into Iraq would take. Mr. Rumsfled answered.” It might take 5 days, 5 weeks or 5 months.
i would suggest to you that it will definitely be over in 5 months”
(words spoken in early March 2003 or close to 5 years ago)

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 29, 2007 at 10:46 am Link to this comment

#103435 by Non Credo on 9/29 at 8:43 am: “...what cannot be said in America’s mainstream media: “If the American attack [on Iran] turns into a long war of attrition…”

Iran’s population is about three times that of Iraq. That’s why Iraq never won the war in the 1970’s-80’s even with indirect US support. Attacking such a nation is no pushover and the Pentagon knows that even if the Neocon idiots can’t or won’t understand it.

#103439 by Non Credo on 9/29 at 9:11 am: “...If these stupid wars are driven by the US’s anxiety about its debts, then praytell, my dear, just how does the US address its debt problems by going massively further into debt with the Iraq war, then starting a new, even more catastrophically costly war against Iran that will push our economy into depression with the rise in oil prices, with the very real possiblility of retaliatory economic action…”

Can’t you see the nexus, Non Credo? The possibility of killing your creditors appeals to the childish American “winner-takes-all” mentality. At any rate, a war would drag everyone else down as well so that the USA could still be top dog - only on a much smaller sh!t-heap!

If you owe the bank a $Million, its your problem but if you owe the bank a$Billion, its their problem. That is how they figure it. The world has to buy $US debt so that they can trade with them. That’s how China and Japan ended up with so much US treasury bonds (debt) through recycling $US trade.

Only thing is that game is just about up now and the $US is headed south as result of pure US domestic greed. Sub-prime mortgage crisis, creditcard debt, let the good times roll - only it is over! Hurricane Katrina was the wakeup call that Washington never heard.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 29, 2007 at 9:10 am Link to this comment

#103423 by Jan on 9/29 at 7:27 am: “...Sorry Douglas, in trying to fix the way your link came out I think I got your name wrong….”

Thank you, thank you, Jan. The other article is interesting too but the USA won’t “succeed in seducing Russia and China” over uranium. They are not suckers or second-rate powers like France or Britain, etc etc. The Shanghai group (SCO) are leaving the IMF behind and are playing their own game now.

The Rise of Competitors - “Although US global predominance remains unrivalled at the beginning of the new millennium, countries such as China, India and Russia could become geopolitical competitors in the coming decades. All three enjoy rapidly growing economies and they use their increasing economic clout to modernize their military forces. In particular the Chinese People’s Liberation Army develops “pockets of excellence” to gain defensive capacities against US forces. Some African and South-American countries, such as Venezuela, turn away from Washington and towards Beijing. In the economic realm, the European Union rivals the US with the creation of the euro, which threatens the status of the US dollar as the world’s major reserve currency. Iran and Russia consider shifting their oil trading to the euro, which could contribute to a Fall of the US dollar….”

Report this

By Deborah, September 29, 2007 at 8:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Americans don’t seem concerned though. They say…“well, how could we bomb Iran, when we’re already bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan?”

Because we, the simple American People have already seen that “shock and awe” didn’t work. Just bombing people from the air and expecting them to cow into submission was a failure. Once they got used to the bombs, they started fighting back.

George Bush’s promises aren’t worth the air they’re…well…aired on. He swore up and down we could overthrow Saddam with a minimum of time, money and troops due to overwhelming American might.

And America believed that those pitiful “rag heads” and “sand n*gg*rs* couldn’t possibly stand up to America. And they have. And Saddam is dead and we still haven’t achieved any of our so-called goals.

One of the promises that Bush made was that “we would never go door-to-door” but we have. And so we sent more troops. And more. And then the surge. And the god-awful amount of lives and limbs, let alone the money spent is enough to make anyone weep. And still we haven’t achieved an of our so-called goals

And the Iraqi’s caught between the insurgency, militias up for power grabs and American or, I guess if there’s anyone else left, coalition troops (is there a coalition anymore - are we still remembering Poland?) - but the Iraqis are either fleeing as refugees or making do where they are and trying to stay alive if they can’t get out.

So yes, Americans are paying attention. I am one simple American black woman, mid-30’s, helping to support a family. I’m trying to do what so many Iraqi’s are trying to do: Stay alive.

I have written and made phone calls to my Senators and Congress people. I would write the President but why waste the paper? I don’t think the man can read what I’d write and I’m sure Cheney wouldn’t bother.

I can’t take off work and join every war protest that comes down the pike. I’ve signed petitions and I keep informed and I vote.

I am very concerned and what’s more, I’m ashamed. Ashamed of what the leaders of my country have done in the name of the American people. Ashamed of what they have done in my name and yours.

Since our government preaches gun control left and right, most of citzenry is unarmed and that leaves us ill-prepared for revolution. And anyone speaking such things, let alone even thinking about ACTING on them is most certain to wind up in Guantanamo or a secret prison somewhere, written off as a traitor.

I read an article once where they compared the Iraq war to the Revolutionary war. Iraq was America and America was the British. I say right comparison but wrong war. Iraqis are the Jews and the American government are the Nazis.

And one day, history will look at us and ask, as it was asked of the Germans, “How could you let this happen.”

And we will only answer that we, here in the land of Liberty, were afraid of being disappeared.

Report this

By Jan, September 29, 2007 at 8:27 am Link to this comment

#103410 by Douglas Chalmers on 9/29 at 6:09 am

Sorry Douglas, in trying to fix the way your link came out I think I got your name wrong. Sorry.

Report this

By Jan, September 29, 2007 at 8:07 am Link to this comment

Douglas Chambers and #103341 by Enemy of State and others

The full link did not work when Doug Chalmbers posted it so I am trying it again:

The other article by the same author is also very useful. It is at:

One comment writer on wrote an excellent explanation of how the U.S. debt is actually driving (ie causing) these wars. Look for the comment by “iyamwutiam September 27th, 2007 3:13 pm” at:
You really need to concentrate to follow his explanation however

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 29, 2007 at 7:09 am Link to this comment

#103341 by Enemy of State on 9/28 at 5:53 pm: “...The American people love to have someone to hate, and Iran fits that part to a T….. And ever sice 79, 99% of the American people have been looking for an excuse to wreck vengence against Iran….”

It all boils down to manipulating a blind public over oil and power games. Bombing people doesn’t make oil cheaper. It gets more expensive and so does the cost of running the military. This is slowly becoming obvious.

The real reason, though, since the 1970’s was the covert need to prop up the $US and the debt-ridden bankrupt US economy:- “...The dollar economy is not limited to the US. Oil reserves traded in dollars belong to it too. Also enterprises, banks and investments, anywhere in the world, belong to it when paid with dollars. They are like small islands of the dollar economy. Benefits and dividends are flowing back to the owners. The value of the investments is influenced by the rate of the dollar. Oil sellers, receiving their proceeds in dollars, are actors in the dollar-economy and usually behave like perfect representatives of the US’ interests. They consider this as their own interest.”

How do you steal oil reserves? “There is still another aspect to the abuse of the dollar. During the demonstrations against the US-invasion of Iraq, a lot of demonstrators understood it was not about weapons of mass destruction. Iraq has world’s second largest oil reserves. Some demonstrators thought, the US was after the oil. And that is also true. But how can you steal oil reserves, which are in the ground and so huge you cannot take them with you?

You do it with currencies. By imposing, that this oil can only be traded in dollars, in one move the US becomes owner of this oil. The US is the only country, which has the right to print dollars and thus can dispose of the oil any time. Other countries that want to buy this oil, have to buy dollars first. In fact they pay their oil to the US at that moment. The dollars they receive are rights to collect a quantity of oil. (Just like when you go to Ikea to buy furniture, you pay first and you receive a note, with which you can collect your furniture at the shop’s back door.) So, basically, dollars are rights to collect oil. And because everybody needs oil, everybody wants these green notes.

So, Saddam’s switch to the Euro at the start of November 2000 was not just an attack on the rate of the dollar. The switch implied at the same time the US could not dispose freely of the oil anymore. The US would have to buy euros to dispose of it. 

Since switching back the dollar on 5 June 2003 [21], the US has, financially, free disposal of the Iraqi oil again. Now it is a matter of installing a strawman-government and to prevent the Iraqi oil trade from switching away from the dollar once again. That is easy to say, but turns out to be more difficult than expected…” aid=6893

Report this

By cyrena, September 28, 2007 at 10:54 pm Link to this comment

#103337 by Jan


Thanks for this excellent essay, explaining to the moron about how Scott’s prediction may be off.

I’d like to add a bit to the explanation if I may.

To begin, the planned hit on Iran, (planned in conjuntion with the hit on Iraq, long before the Coup of 2000) is a Dick Cheney et all operation. And indeed, Dick Cheney is overwhelming pissed at this point, because he EXPECTED it to go down as planned, at the end of last year, or the beginning of this one. By the beginning of 2007, the US had NINE war ships in the Persian Gulf, with all cannons pointed at Iran. As far as I know, they are still there.

But, because of the WMD lies about Iraq, he ran into enoumous opposition, FROM THE COMMANDERS THEMSELVES, on the Iran invasion. ( has one of a few letters from this collection of military brass, to the Pres…DON’T bomb Iran) Some even stated in writing, that they would refuse to follow such orders. That didn’t stop cheney though, who has been ‘full speed ahead” since day one.

But, it did slow him down, since he had to try to manage an end-run around the others, (like Condi the Rice) who had was whispering in the Boy’s other ear, that it might not be such a good idea after all. (You’ll remember that she began last year rattling all sorts of sabres at Iran).

Also, like with Iraq, they would never have received any sort of support or resolution from the UN Security Council, because (at the time) neither Russia, China, or France was likely to go along with it, just like they didn’t go along with the decision to invade and occupy Iraq, which is why THAT remains an illegal invasion and occupation. (never got a UN Security Council resolution, because again, France, Russia and China were going to block it).

So, that’s why the new French president is important to the new effort to bomb them. The former French President knew what was up, but the new one is right in GW’s pocket. The cheerleader all the way.

Meantime, they’ve tried since, with all of the old tactics, (not even new ones) to hit Iran, by making up all of the stories that Scott puts forth in his piece. I specifically remember that display of “finding” those alleged Iranian IED’s with “serial numbers” on them. Right, everybody puts serial numbers on their IED’s when they’re gonna export them to another country. First non-existent WMD for Iraq, and then some IED’s with Iranian “serial numbers” on them.

And, if we go back to the lies that brought us Iraq, you’ll see that the last year couple of years of the plan for Iran, is a déjà vu.

Thing is, Iran isn’t Iraq, and they DO have an army, and so they WILL fight back. But, Cheney’s not worried. He’s got his bunker here. (a bigger and better one than he used to hide during 9-11) and he’s got his palace in Dubai. And, he’s chompin’ at the bit.

Full speed ahead.

Americans don’t seem concerned though. They say…“well, how could we bomb Iran, when we’re already bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan?” Reasonable question, but a simple enough answer…with all of the airplanes and the bombs. How many troops do we need for that? We’ve got the airplanes…one bomber pilot per airplane, and they just blast away. Doesn’t take manpower, just firepower. We’re bombing urban areas of Iraq from the air, why wouldn’t they do that to Iran?

What, millions of dead civilians? Nope. We see that doesn’t have anything to do with cheney’s price of oil in the Middle East. If they’re in the way…those are the breaks.

Cheney says…full speed ahead, because he’s tired of messing with all of this BS. There’s land to conquor, and OIL to be stolen. It’s the PNAC plan in action, even if a bit delayed.

Report this

By Enemy of State, September 28, 2007 at 6:53 pm Link to this comment

Unfortunately I find myself in agreement with Corporate Jesus. The American people love to have someone to hate, and Iran fits that part to a T. The Iranian leadership thinks its all just a good-cop bad-cop game, and won’t back down because they think war not a serious threat, but a cheap poker bluff.

And ever sice 79, 99% of the American people have been looking for an excuse to wreck vengence against Iran. How can we slow down this train to hell, when most of the people buy the emotional crap constantly fed to them?

Report this

By Jan, September 28, 2007 at 6:32 pm Link to this comment

#103256 by voice of truth on 9/28 at 9:36 am said:
“Why is this convicted Pedophile writing articles on this website???”

“Voice of Truth” is NOT telling the truth here. Scott Ritter was NOT convicted of Pedophilia. On the contrary, Scott was set up in a sting in the first place. He was cleared by the court. However, the way his case was used by his war mongering opponents in perfect timing to stop Ritter going to Iraq to speak against the coming invasion of Iraq was disgraceful.

#103299 by Crimson Ghost on 9/28 at 1:46 pm wrote:
“Scott…you earlier predicted Bush would attack Iran by the end of 2006.

Could it be that you will be wrong this time as well?”

It IS possible that Scott Ritter is wrong this time too. But I think the attack is only a matter of time - in the mean time the U.S. warmongers keep their propaganda and demonisation coming.

So why didn’t the bombing happened as Scott predicted in 2006? For one, certain important things in preparation hadn’t worked out well, e.g. the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.

I believe a bombing campaign will start without any warning as the means are in place and the U.S. regime is just waiting for the right moment. But first the U.S. is trying to involve France more now they have a new president more to Bush’s liking. Then while they are still talking with Russia and in the U.N. etc we will hear that cruise missiles, stealth bombers and then bunker busters have been unleashed.

I do not think it will be a limited attack because they will try to anticipate whatever the Iranians might try to do to fight back. e.g. the U.S. will take out all air defences and command posts and will probably occupy the area around the Strait of Hormuz to prevent the Iranians from closing it. So this will NOT be a limited, pinprick bombing run in my view. Therefore it could end up VERY BAD for everyone and we must strive to stop it from happening NOW.

Report this

By Jan, September 28, 2007 at 6:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

#103256 by voice of truth on 9/28 at 9:36 am said:
“Why is this convicted Pedophile writing articles on this website???”

“Voice of Truth” is NOT telling the truth here. Scott Ritter was NOT convicted of Pedophilia. On the contrary, Scott was set up in a sting in the first place. He was cleared by the court. However, the way his case was used by his war mongering opponents in perfect timing to stop Ritter going to Iraq to speak against the coming invasion of Iraq was disgraceful.

#103299 by Crimson Ghost on 9/28 at 1:46 pm wrote:
“Scott…you earlier predicted Bush would attack Iran by the end of 2006.

Could it be that you will be wrong this time as well?”

It IS possible that Scott Ritter is wrong this time too. But I think the attack is only a matter of time - in the mean time the U.S. warmongers keep their propaganda and demonisation coming.

So why didn’t the bombing happened as Scott predicted in 2006? For one, certain important things in preparation hadn’t worked out well, e.g. the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.

I believe a bombing campaign will start without any warning as the means are in place and the U.S. regime is just waiting for the right moment. But first the U.S. is trying to involve France more now they have a new president more to Bush’s liking. Then while they are still talking with Russia and in the U.N. etc we will hear that cruise missiles, stealth bombers and then bunker busters have been unleashed.

I do not think it will be a limited attack because they will try to anticipate whatever the Iranians might try to do to fight back. e.g. the U.S. will take out all air defences and command posts and will probably occupy the area around the Strait of Hormuz to prevent the Iranians from closing it. So this will NOT be a limited, pinprick bombing run in my view. Therefore it could end up VERY BAD for everyone and we must strive to stop it from happening NOW.

Report this

By Tor250, September 28, 2007 at 2:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To prevent an Iran war Bush and Cheney must be put in jail for massmurder, specifically of the victims of the 9/11 attack. It has been publicly known for a long time, at least by people who read the web that it was an inside job. Please see the sites


See also the videos 911justice and 911mysteries

Put this info on NYT 1/2 page ad


Report this

By Crimson Ghost, September 28, 2007 at 2:46 pm Link to this comment


I respect you immensely for having the courage to take on the warmongering Israel lobby.

But I must point out that you earlier predicted Bush would attack Iran by the end of 2006.

Could it be that you will be wrong this time as well?

Report this

By worldcitizen, September 28, 2007 at 11:14 am Link to this comment

Does anyone have contact information for Scott Ritter?  I am doing some research that he would be highly useful for.

Report this

By voice of truth, September 28, 2007 at 10:36 am Link to this comment

Why is this convicted Pedophile writing articles on this website???

Report this
JimBob's avatar

By JimBob, September 28, 2007 at 9:28 am Link to this comment

I refuse to believe that our military leaders would obey a command to bomb Iran because they think it’s a good idea or because they’re duty-bound to follow orders.  If they do, it won’t be because they respect their CIC, it’ll be because of the jobs promised them in retirement by the defense contractors who profit by more war.

Report this

By Louise, September 28, 2007 at 9:27 am Link to this comment

Kucinich to Force Impeachment Vote on the House Floor

September 27, 2007
Jodin Morey

“This bombshell just dropped by Rep. Dennis Kucinich on the Ed Schultz show. Kucinich is considering forcing an impeachment vote on a “privileged resolution” on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Time to call your representative and let him/her know that you will not support any candidate who doesn’t support accountability and the rule of law.”

Report this

By Jeanine Molloff, September 28, 2007 at 8:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

As Greenspan declared in his book; the Iraq occupation was concocted for the express purpose of ‘securing the oil.’  Translation—we invaded and occupied Iraq to steal the oil for multinational corporations and used the U.S. Military as a private security force for corporate pirates.  This ties in to the theory otherwise known as ‘peak oil.’  The phenomenon of peak oil, refers to the finite supply of this substance and obtaining the highest prices for the smallest amount ever offered historically.  As the oil pirates squeeze the last shekel out of individuals and other business interests; they will ‘reinvest’ those ill gotten gains to fund hostile takeovers of most other industrial corporate giants.  Rival corporations, (namely those not in the oil and energy industry) need to be fearful—they’re next.  What these monolithic energy corps can’t take via hostile takeover;they will probably ‘engineer’ through other means such as ‘security interests.’  Can you imagine Coca-Cola Corp. being told their CEO has to be jailed indefinitely and sign over all shares as he/she is a vital security risk or ‘person of interest.’  None of these other goliaths should count on law enforcement, as they will be privatized by Blackwater or some other similar criminal entity. 

As for the traitors in Congress; it’s time to make their lives miserable.  Though the marches help; we must become even nastier.  Ostracise their families back home.  Tell them off in the grocery or at the church.  Locate their homes and protest outside on the public sidewalk.  Embarass the spouses of these criminals.  Most importantly—BEGIN RECALL PETITIONS ON ALL OF THEM.  THE FIRST STEP IS TO ACCESS THE REGULATIONS AND PETITION FORMS FOR RECALL ACTIVITIES.  THEN FORM A COMMITTEE AND DIVIDE UP THE WORK.  BEGIN CANVASSING, AND KEEP AN AUDIO RECORD OF ALL ACTIVITIES, SO YOU HAVE BACKUP WHEN THE PETITIONS ARE CHALLENGED.  MAKE LIFE MISERABLE FOR EACH AND EVERY SECRETARY OF STATE—THEY ARE THE PEOPLE WHO REGULATE ELECTIONEERING.  AS MY COLLEAGUES ARE FOND OF SAYING, STAY ON THEM LIKE WHITE ON RICE.  SPREAD THE WORD IN YOUR COMMUNITIES.  CONTINUE TO BLOW THE WHISTLE. 
Jeanine Molloff

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 28, 2007 at 8:08 am Link to this comment

#103219 by Lefty on 9/28 at 6:47 am: “...if you were any dumber, you’d forget to breath! You are utterly clueless!  That, or you’re an arab, islamist, fundamentalist, troll, masquerading as something you’re not….”

You know, one of the infamous Truthdig “BIFPAT” needs some explaining, Lefty. But, I understand that you are trying to be loyal to your Republican ‘God’s Own Party’ machine when you post such obligatory denials of humanity’s right to exist on this planet or even on this forum. At this time of day, you should try brushing your teeth before you blog in future, eh, to take the smell away, uhh!!

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 28, 2007 at 7:28 am Link to this comment

#103210 by Non Credo on 9/28 at 6:17 am: “...And don’t forget the radiation release from the destroyed nuclear power plants themselves…”

Yes, Non Credo, another Chernobyl or Windscale (Sellarfield) and that was supposedly why the Israelis wanted to bomb the reactor before it became operative. Again, supposedly, they did that in Iraq in the 1970’s at the outset too.

This time around, though, starting WW3 is hardly acting “responsibly”, radiation fallout or not. I expect Russia would wipe Israel off the face of the Earth for good. But the Israelis think they can use the USA to bluff other powers.

Israel is desperate to control oil and water and that means keeping ahead of of developments by other states in the region as regards the balance of power. In the end, Israel will lose completely when the major powers supporting them (USA and the EU) get sick of putting themselves at risk fincancially or otherwise or making themselves look unpopular for this little runt.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 28, 2007 at 7:14 am Link to this comment

#103188 by Non Credo on 9/28 at 4:41 am: “......even a nuclear “bunker-buster” would produce large amounts of radiation. This could cause thousands of casualties among civilian populations….”

You’re basicaly talking about replicating a blast the size of a Hiroshima or a Nagasaki. We know the effects of radiation and resultant fallout were very real. Any wind will cause contamination over a vast area - in effect, another Chernobyl, uhh. Its a real wank to delude people into believing that using those things can in any way have any less effects!!!

Report this

By Doomed-f, September 28, 2007 at 5:12 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

here we go again…..

According to journalist Jason Leopold, sources at former Cheney company Halliburton allege that, as recently as January of 2005, Halliburton sold key components for a nuclear reactor to an Iranian oil development company. Leopold says his Halliburton sources have intimate knowledge of the business dealings of both Halliburton and Oriental Oil Kish, one of Iran’s largest private oil companies.

... go to (click on the link above)

Report this

By Verne Arnold, September 28, 2007 at 3:51 am Link to this comment

#103113 by Lefty on 9/27 at 8:02 pm
(641 comments total)

“don’t you think that it would be an easy enough mission to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities, the way Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear facilities, without “war?”.”

But, we will nuke them.  Iraq’s facility was above ground…15 minutes and it was over.  Iran has everything underground, 75 feet.  Bucheney is talking about taking out every facility including their entire military capability (armed forces; army, airforce, navy, and air defense system) 2000 sorties over three to four days.  Nuclear “bunker-busters” think that’s okay?

Report this

By Verne Arnold, September 28, 2007 at 2:05 am Link to this comment

Scott Ritter is like Paul Revere; he warns us in advance of the coming “event”.  How we respond is the crucial decision:

You know, me thinks it’s time for Russia and China to tell Georgie Porgy and Cheney Weenie, it’s time to step back and take a deep breath.  It’s time to realize you’re not the sole super power of the world; there is another one…the rest of the world!

Bush/Cheney need to know that to bomb Iran they/we will pay the piper…you cannot ignore the rest of the world and survive, insulated from your actions.  There will be a price.  These are not threats but a statement of reality.

The American people must not think that by letting their government behave in this way absolves them of responsibility…indeed; in a democracy they are “most” responsible.  In this there are no innocents!  Those that do not take direct action will drag everyone to eventual oblivion…each to their own hell.

Report this

By Marshall, September 27, 2007 at 11:25 pm Link to this comment

#103113 by Lefty on 9/27 at 8:02 pm

<<don’t you think that it would be an easy enough mission to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities, the way Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear facilities, without “war?”>>

...which is why I said “use of force”, not “war”.  But to answer your question, no, I don’t believe it would be easy enough; the use of force would simply be the best of all the bad scenarios.

Report this

By msgmi, September 27, 2007 at 9:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s all planned out by the neocons. The contractor force, 100K+, in Iraq will be mobilized to invade, occupy, and to provide immediate security in Teheran. Neocon intelligence developed by Doug Feith and Paul Wolfowitz et al indicates that the majority of people in Iran have made up their minds for a welcoming-liberation party for the U.S. led liberators. Paul Bremer will return as the CPA and Donald Rumsfeld will work behind the scenes in the Shah-zone to ensure a rapid transition of democratic process. Next stop is Syria which will be overrun by the Iraqi Sunni minority backed by the regional bordering Sunni majority states. This plan is to be executed NLT August, 2008.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, September 27, 2007 at 9:17 pm Link to this comment

RE: #103091 by 911truthdotorg on 9/27

Great post.

The CURRENT business world mantra: Create a need, and fill it….

It used to be: FIND a need, and fill it.

CEO’s and their henchmen: the sleeziest people in the known universe.

Report this

By purplewolf, September 27, 2007 at 9:13 pm Link to this comment





Report this

By Robert Hutwohl, September 27, 2007 at 8:14 pm Link to this comment

Like a spoiled rich kid who has always gotten whatever he wants, George Bush is going for Iran. And the rich kid’s parents, Congress, are going to give him whatever he demands because he is used to getting what he wants. They all think it is a game to play with other human lives.

And if Hillary gets into office, she will continue the tradition, no doubt about it. The only difference between her and Bush is she can spell and has better rhetoric.

Report this

By 911truthdotorg, September 27, 2007 at 6:46 pm Link to this comment

The Monster(s)......

Saddam Hussein Tried to Give up and Leave Iraq -
Bush White House Kept Facts Secret

What could have been saved? A trillion dollars, a million lives, the global reputation of the U.S. - but that wasn’t the plan

Prison Planet | September 27, 2007
Paul Joseph Watson

Neo-Cons could have saved a trillion dollars, spared over a million lives and prevented tens of thousands of dead and injured U.S. soldiers but decided to unleash carnage anyway, after it was revealed last night that Saddam Hussein offered to step down and go into exile one month before the invasion of Iraq.

“Fearing defeat, Saddam was prepared to go peacefully in return for £500million ($1billion),” reports the Daily Mail .

“The extraordinary offer was revealed yesterday in a transcript of talks in February 2003 between George Bush and the then Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar at the President’s Texas ranch.”
“The White House refused to comment on the report last night. But, if verified, it is certain to raise questions in Washington and London over whether the costly four-year war could have been averted.”

According to the tapes, Bush told Aznar that whether Saddam was still in Iraq or not, “We’ll be in Baghdad by the end of March.”

Why didn’t the Neo-Cons take Saddam’s offer? After all, the invasion was about “weapons of mass destruction” and “spreading freedom”, we were told. With the dictator gone, the U.N. and American forces were free to roam the country in search of the non-existent weapons while setting up the “utopian democracy” that Iraqis now live under.

The Neo-Cons didn’t take the offer because the invasion of Iraq was not about Saddam Hussein, it was about making fat profits for the military-industrial complex by bombing the country back into the stone age, slaughtering countless innocents in the process, seizing control of oil factories, and setting up military bases as a means of launching the Empire’s next jaunt into Iran.

The invasion of Iraq was about having a justification to stay there indefinitely and break the country up into different pieces as was the plan all along .

Here’s what $1 billion could have saved us.

- At least $200 million every single day that could have been spent on fighting poverty, building schools, taking men to Mars, ad infinitum.

- At least $1 trillion that the Iraq war will eventually cost if we ever leave. A trillion is a million millions.

- At least 1 million dead Iraqis according to the latest numbers , along with millions more that will die in the years to come as a result of depleted uranium poisoning, malnutrition, cholera and all manner of other horrors brought about by the invasion.

- Over 1.1 million displaced Iraqis who have been forced to leave their new “utopian democracy” and another million who have been forced to leave their homes due to sectarian violence and persecution.

- Over 3800 dead U.S. soldiers since the invasion began.

- 300 dead coalition soldiers since the invasion began.

- Anything from 23,000 to 100,000 injured U.S. soldiers since the invasion began.

- The reputation of the U.S. around the world as the most hated nation on earth.

- The ballooning deficit and the probable eventual collapse of the U.S. dollar and the economy.

Thanks Neo-Cons - I hope it was worth it.

Report this

By weather, September 27, 2007 at 5:07 pm Link to this comment

War w/Iran. Joe ‘the fraud’ Lieberman gets a woody.

Report this

By Don Stivers, September 27, 2007 at 3:58 pm Link to this comment

Give Iraq the freedom they deserve, impeach our whole administration.

Anybody hear of Pedro Zapeta?  His only crime was to sneak into the U.S. and work his butt off.  Now the government is going to keep ALL of his money and send him home where he was already headed.  This is a Christian nation indeed.

Let’s attack Iran so we can spend Pedro’s money on another war.  In a Christian like fashion of course.

Attack first, turn your cheek later.

Report this

By dick, September 27, 2007 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s all according to the plans “Securing the Realm” and “Project for the New American Century”, both written on behalf of Israel by the same neocons now in control of the Bush Admin.. Both plans are on the web.

Report this

By omop, September 27, 2007 at 2:21 pm Link to this comment

One has to admit that Scott Ritter has been quite explicit regarding he imbecility of the socalled “cakewalk” into Iraq. And one would think that his views regarding the present potential “freeing/changing regimes In Iran” is considered to be a “ONE DAY” cakewalk into Tehran by overly enthusiatic neocons.

Be that as it may Iran is not Iraq. Iran is a member of the Shanghai grouping that includes China, Russia, and within the frameworkd of such an alliance both Russia and China are legally bound through agreements to drop nuclear bombs on any one that drops such bombs on Iran.

The neocons may be not only over-reaching but in actuality getting what they have consistently claimed they are preventing the destrucction of Israel.

If the US is suckered again by either the neocons and/or Israel then the potential of a military coup in the US becomes a real probability. this is an omop opinion. As far as the continued existance of Israel as it exists today that would be highly doubtful.

In effect the end result of military acts against Iran can only lead to catastrophic ends. The times are ripe for a showdown between either inately sensible or inately insane homo sapiens.

Report this

By Kevin James, September 27, 2007 at 2:06 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

TD pleas find and translate this important transcript:

New light cast on Bush’s plans for Iraq war
By Andrew Ward in Washington

Published: September 27 2007 20:50 | Last updated: September 27 2007 20:50

A leaked transcript of talks between President George W. Bush and José Maria Aznar, former Spanish prime minister, has cast fresh light on the diplomatic wrangling that preceded the Iraq war.

Speaking in February 2003, a month before the invasion, Mr Bush told his Spanish counterpart that US forces would be in Baghdad by the end of March regardless of whether the United Nations authorised the use of force.

He also talked about punishing countries that failed to support a UN resolution backing the war and outlined an offer by Saddam Hussein, the former Iraqi leader, to go into exile in return for $1bn, which he said the US would reject.

The White House on Thursday declined to comment in response to questions about the transcript, which was first reported this week in El País, the Spanish newspaper, but did not challenge the accuracy of the report.

“We have to get rid of Saddam,” Mr Bush told Mr Aznar in a meeting at the president’s Texas ranch, according to the transcript.

“In two weeks we will be ready militarily. We will be in Baghdad at the end of March.”

The meeting in question came as the US and its allies, including Spain and the UK, were lobbying the UN Security Council for a second resolution authorising military action if Saddam failed to disarm.

Mr Bush said Angola risked losing aid and that a proposed US trade deal with Chile could be blocked if the two countries, which both occupied Security Council seats at the time, failed to support the resolution.

The US eventually dropped its bid for a fresh resolution after it became clear it would be blocked.

Mr Bush told Mr Aznar he was playing a “good cop, bad cop” routine with Tony Blair, the then British prime minister. “I don’t mind being the bad cop if Blair is the good cop,” he said.

He predicted that the war would be won “without destruction” and said planning was under way for “post-Saddam Iraq”.

“I think there is a good basis for a better future,” he said. “Iraq has a good bureaucracy and a relatively robust civil society.”

Outlining contacts between Saddam and Egypt, Mr Bush said: “He’s indicated he would be prepared to go into exile if he’s allowed to take $1bn and all the information he wants about weapons of mass destruction.” Mr Bush ruled out such a deal, describing Saddam as “a thief, a terrorist, a war criminal”.

Report this

By stymied, September 27, 2007 at 1:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

We have to stop a war with Iran, but can it be done with the methods Ritter suggests?  All the constituent pressure on Congress and reasoned arguments in blogs and the mainstream press have had zero effect on getting us out of Iraq.  Ritter questions the value of demonstrations, but what do we have left?  Have our representatives been bought, blackmailed, threatened, drugged??

Report this

By nigel, September 27, 2007 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

And everyone thinks that the nukes that were shipped from Minot, ND to Louisiana was a mistake. They were probably trying to slip them onto a bomber bound for the Middle East so there could be a mistake (or to stage them).
Who can believe the excuse from Minot that “special weapons” and dud weapons just happened to be stored in the same bunker? I would be very interested to know when this was ordered/authorized and who ordered/authorized it. It is just like storing cans of good and bad food together and telling the cooks not to mix them up.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, September 27, 2007 at 1:30 pm Link to this comment

Quote: “... just wait until we start bombing Iran. The countdown to another war is both real and terrifying…”

And that is the point! They (the GOP Neocons) want you to remain terrified. As long as they can keep you distracted with pathetic garbage issues about Iraq or Iran, Washington can go ahead with its plans to build nuclear reactors everywhere. And, of course, its all ‘justification’ for the never-ending splurge on the ridiculously huge military-industrial complex which employs so many voting Americans in every state.

Report this

By Hammo, September 27, 2007 at 1:18 pm Link to this comment

Ritter speaks to Americans about finding the truth and acting upon it. In a related news development about grassroots efforts, it’s good to see people speaking up and trying to change the media and other “powers that be” such as in the campaign to bring back a popular HBO show set in San Diego.

Sure, people should also be assertive about other things going on in Iraq, with Iran, within our government, military, society, the news media and elsewhere.

Though this coaltion to bring back a TV show seems like a small thing in these times of danger from enemies foreign and domestic, the fact that Americans are organizing and petitioning the New York City-based media bosses of Time-Warner Corp. seems like a good sign.

And the show they want back has elements that can change the consciousness of Americans … and that is at the heart of many of our current challenges.

More information in the article …

“Grassroots coalition of TV viewers wants HBO’s ‘John from Cincinnati’ to get second season” ( September 26, 2007)

Report this

By Eron, September 27, 2007 at 12:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Re: Corporate Jesus’s comments - I think you’re a bit off-base here… Not that I don’t agree that changing the American public’s mind [on Iran or any other topic] is a sysiphean task, nor do I disagree that laziness is prevalent. But, rather than using tactics of humiliation and shame, you would do much better to send out a cry to have people use those technologies that you have a neo-ludite take on to, for instance, use that iPhone’s nifty networking technology to forward along this knowledgeable article to all your contacts; to use that prosaic mellowness to think logically and critically about chaotic and emotional issues; to send out a donation to a anti-war charity with that credit card. As for NASCAR, I have no idea, but maybe think creatively rather than with disdain - how about an ad that points out that viewers won’t get to watch their race if we have a massive oil crisis if we go to war with Iran. As Ritter [whom I only occasionally agree with, but always read] points out, while it is a messy choice, a focused effort on one topic, such as preventing war with Iran, is possible… if our tactics are smart and focused.

Report this

By Nathan, September 27, 2007 at 11:53 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I can’t beleive anyone thinks Iran is actually making Nukes.  Didn’t we say the same thing about Iraq and WMD’s?  We didn’t listen to the independent UN inspectors then, to our detriment, and the same thing is happening right now.

Report this

By writeon, September 27, 2007 at 11:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The problem is, that stopping Bush from giving the order to launch an attack on Iran, is, unfortunately, given the limited time available, unrealistic. I realize, the term ‘unrealistic’ seems strangely defeatist, but who really believes Congress or the Democratic Party will impeach Bush and remove him from office? Bush still has enormous power and who can stop him? In the olden days, such an unlucky leader, would be ‘eliminated’ by an ‘unfortunate’ hunting accident. Alas, the King walked in front of a stray arrow. The King is dead, long live the King! Today, however, such radical and terminal ‘solutions’ are far more difficult to engineer, and anyway we’d end up with King Dick holding the reins of power.

How does one stop an attack on Iran then? I think it’s going to be touch and go. It may be possible to avert war, but I’m not overly optimistic. The ruling elite in the United States are seemingly agreed on one thing, Iran is a real and present threat to American interests, whatever that really means, and Iran has to be stopped now, sooner rather than later, and whatever the cost. So Bush not only has the support of his God, but also of the vast majority of mainstream politicians from both parties, much of the media elite, and Israel. That is a powerful base. Personally, I think we’re on a hair-trigger, a little spark could start the conflagration which could go anywhere. Some people must have felt like this before the outbreak of the first world war. But what really worries me is, what happens if Iran strikes back? What happens if they launch attacks against US forces in Iran and against the armada in the Gulf? How bad could it get? And if it goes wrong and US casualties explode do we nuke them or not? And if we slide into nuking Iran where do we go from there? What will the Middle East look like after a nuclear war? What kind of country will America become after nuking Iran? Can American democracy survive a nuclear war against Iran?

Clearly this is pretty alarmist stuff, but I believe we’re potentially entering uncharted waters here, and we’re in deadly danger of crossing an invisible line that leads towards barbarism and away from civilization. The stakes are high. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that. I just wish other nations around the world were more aware of how close we are to war with Iran and were openly showing their opposition to an American policy which is arguably insane.

Part of me doesn’t want to believe all this and how bad it could get. Another part believes Bush and his coterie are the most dangerous Western leaders since Adolf Hitler and the Nazies. Perhaps they really want Iran to retaliate after a conventional attack. The attack is a provocation. Then we’ll have the excuse to nuke them and remove the only credible threat to our rule in the entire Middle East, and then we can move in and take all that oil and gas we so desperately need to maintain our excessive lifestyle for a few decades more. But that’s just a nightmare isn’t it and I’ll soon be awake?

Report this
RAE's avatar

By RAE, September 27, 2007 at 11:15 am Link to this comment

Just reminding those with their finger on the button of the US atomic weapons… IRAN has many friends who also have atomic weapons. Starting any kind of war with IRAN I predict will be the biggest and perhaps last mistake the USA will ever make.

Remember… ALL other “great societies” SELF-DESTRUCTED. What makes you think the USA will be any different?

Report this

By Marshall, September 27, 2007 at 10:54 am Link to this comment

Scott Ritter: Do you believe the US should allow Iran to build the nukes you believe it is pursuing?

If not, then how exactly do we go about preventing this without backing it up with a credible threat of force?

Report this

By Eric L Prentis, September 27, 2007 at 10:35 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Congress needs to vote to restrict President Bush’s power to make a preemptive strike against Iran over the trumped up charges of nuclear proliferation. Starting something that you cannot finish is the height of folly, just ask the south in the US civil war.

Report this

By Mudwollow, September 27, 2007 at 10:07 am Link to this comment

Thank you reality news Truthdig. Thank you Scott Ritter. I very much appreciate your last paragraph in which you tied things together and illuminated potential action we all can take.

Nothing is simple about any of this. But the fact that Iran sits on top of such massive petroleum reserves continually comes to mind is the real reason they are being set up for attack. It’s just too simplistic. But underneath all the reasons that sound good there’s usually a real reason.

Report this

By Corporate Jesus, September 27, 2007 at 8:35 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

To stop this war the American people must be acquainted with the facts about the middle east in order to fight the media propaganda.  The American people are comfortable with ignorance and ipods, prozac and soundbites, nascar and credit cards.  We must face it, the American people are either too stupid or lazy to even want to know, or in most cases even care.  And not caring is no excuse for allowing such death as we’ve already forgotten, let alone triggering an open region wide war.  I know my fellow citizens and they only care for materialism, lightly veiled racism, and overt militarism.  We are already complicit in the deaths of 600,000 or more people.  Every one of us is part of it. 
So, buy stocks in the Defense industry folks.  You’re gonna need the money for the nano iphone.

Report this

By Peter S, September 27, 2007 at 8:22 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Another brilliant and insightful article from Scott Ritter. If war with Iran is the end game that the Bush administration wants to play then we need to change tactics now. We gave the leaders of the Democratic Party in congress a mandate to thwart the endless occupation of Iraq and they let us down. This policy is what I have feared could happen when the majority of Americans knew Iraq was a complete failure. After the mid term elections I thought the neocons would inflict their doctrine on the world one more time before leaving office. If you attack Iran then the 3 biggest ME oil producers are under US control, a huge carrot indeed for these greedy bastards to contemplate. We don’t want the 2008 Presidential race during WW3, so lets stop this insane juggernaut before it takes hold and then sends us all to hell with it.

Report this

By ocjim, September 27, 2007 at 7:39 am Link to this comment

As Ritter states, there seems to be little or nothing we can do about getting us out of the failure called Iraq, but stopping the march toward attacking Iran can be stopped. The real danger involves a continued silence regarding the deadly repercussions of attacking Iran, including a regional war, economic upheaval,global terrorism, use of tactical nuclear weapons, a threat of suspended American elections, and martial law. These are all real threats and like Iraq we are not talking about them. We can be certain that the Bush administration and neocons will shroud plans to attack Iran in secrecy so now is the time to discuss the deadly consequences. Do you want Dr. Strangelove Bush at the helm when this all happens? No way.

Report this

By Grace Anderson, September 27, 2007 at 7:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I heard Hillary Clinton last night in the debate and her apparent knowledge of an Israel strike on Syria.  She seemed more informed on this than I have been able to be.  Awhile ago she said we should not be fighting this war but preparing for the next one.  I find her the most frightening of the candidates for president in regard to war with Iran.
We don’t need an American Iron Lady.  Thank you.
            Old Lady

Report this

By Steve, September 27, 2007 at 6:53 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The caption to the accompanying photo says, “Vice President Dick Cheney struts in front of an F/A-18 fighter jet aboard the USS John C. Stennis aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf. The Stennis is part of a carrier group sent to the region in order to intimidate, and perhaps bombard, Iran.”

I’m looking out my window here in the US and see the USS JOHN C STENNIS tied up at the pier. You need to get all the facts right to maintain the integrity of your argument.

Report this
Right Top, Site wide - Care2
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right Internal Skyscraper, Site wide

Like Truthdig on Facebook