I told you so, Steve. Think, April.
The clock is ticking on Little Boots second term and the chances to drop an A-bomb on Tehran and get control of their oil is running out.
If he acts without Congressional approval then there should be sufficient votes to impeach his ass and send him packing to Paraguay.
Posted by Christopher at April 2, 2007 04:20 PMThank god for you; I thought I was alone in predicting Nuclear 9/11. It's a coming thanks to Bush and cronies. All under the guise of drills; possibly simulations linked to remote control craft.
Posted by Natas Enasni at April 2, 2007 05:01 PMClues to the next step on Fox News Sunday?
FNS w/ Chris Wallace SCHEDULE
FNS Interview
NEWS ARCHIVE
Transcript: Sens. McConnell, Biden on 'FOX News Sunday'
Sunday, April 01, 2007
WALLACE: Let's move on, if we can, because we're clearly not going to settle this here today, to Iran, where the regime has seized 15 British naval personnel, marines and sailors.
There's now talk in Tehran of putting them on trial. This is just one more case of the Iranians thumbing their nose at the rest of the world.
Senator Biden, is there something that the U.S., Britain and the rest of the Western world can do to get tougher with Iran?
BIDEN: Yeah, I think there is. There's two things. One, we can all get tougher with them diplomatically and ratchet this up. By the way, I would argue that this is a product of the increasing success of the Bush administration's new strategy on Iran, and I mean that sincerely.
They have made Iran the world's problem. They have gotten the world together and continue to put pressure on Iran and they have taken the initiative away from the Iranians. And I think this is deliberately planned for the Iranians to try to regain the initiative and appeal to the Arab street, saying, "Look, we can take on, we can take on the Americans."
WALLACE: What do we do about it?
BIDEN: Well, I think you do two things. Number one, I think you continue to ratchet up, get the entire world to ratchet up further the pressure on Iran, but I think quietly you have to be preparing to be able to deal with Iranian oil and be prepared to, down the road, make the kind of -- take the kind of action that would cut off their importation of refined oil and affect their export of crude oil.
You can hit them very, very badly. But I don't think you talk about that publicly. Were I president, I wouldn't be talking about that. I'd be planning that while I was moving on every front diplomatically.
And there's those who think, as you know, that the Iranians are going to continue to try to string this out as long as they can, maybe another two to three weeks before it goes code red here, but they constantly have an ability to stumble over themselves.
So who knows what they're going to do. I don't think they really are fully in control internally as well.
Biden is a Democrat. It looks like Bush has congressional approval sub silentia to attack Iran.
Will the next escallation be a blockade of Iran's import of refined gasoline and diesel? Certainly sufficient ships are there. Gasoline is one of Iran's weak points.
If blockaded, there is no telling how Iran would respond.
Also, it seems that high oil prices is one of Bush&Co's prime directives. Certainly a blockade of Iran would be to the benefit of Bush's Good Oil Buddies--and if Iran gets too uppidy by attacking a ship or plane, the bombers are there to take out the whole country. It's ok to shoot back in self-defense, isn't it?
Of course, no one in charge has the slightest inkling that the genocide that will be the collateral damage is the moral equivalent to Darfur or Riwanda.
Do you see one named source for this piece
"If they continue at this pace, and they get the centrifuges to work and actually enrich uranium on a distinct basis," said David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security, "then you're looking at them having, potentially having enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 2009."
Not to be picky or anything, but doesn't he count as a named source?
Posted by phuknjrk at April 2, 2007 05:19 PMHe was one of the aluiminum tubes guys prior to the Iraq invasion.
He was a cheerleader for the Iraq Invasion! Now a cheerleader again! Why should we give Albright any credence at all?
Phuknjrk: David Albright is not a named source for the primary assertion of Iran having the centrifuges in place. The piece attributes that to "sources familiar with the dramatic upgrade", which is no attribution at all.
Posted by dwm at April 2, 2007 05:27 PMThe clock is ticking on Little Boots second term and the chances to drop an A-bomb on Tehran and get control of their oil is running out.
Well, they'll greet us in the streets with sweet coffee and dates. Isn't that how the neo-con thinking goes? Unfortunately -depending on your view, Iran is not Iraq. We certainly don't have the groud forces to engage Iran but, yes, we can certainly wreak havoc with their infrastructure from the air. We can then watch the entire Middle East erupt.
We're already losing twice as many troops in Iraq as the Iraqi Army. Are we ready for that to go to 10 times as many? Neither Russia nor China will sit still for this obvious move towards hegemony in the region. Expect the latest and best of the technology they copied from us (via Israel) to get to the Iranians quickly. Pakistan will go the way of the Taliban, and Saudi Arabia will strongly resist us if we do move against Iran. The Israelis will pay very dearly.
They'll greet us with sweet coffee and dates. That's all you need to think about.
Expect gas at $7.50 a gallon and more of our blood and treasure pouring into the sand than you can imagine.
Posted by phidipides at April 2, 2007 05:28 PMI owe an apology to Dr. Albright, he questioned the connection between the tubes and Iraqi nuclear program
Posted by Nobody at April 2, 2007 05:35 PMI'm just on a wait and see stance.. but I don't doubt the reports..
Iran already said they planned on installing 3000 centrifuges.. if they're up to a thousand now it just means they're following their own plan..
Ahmadinejad says he's got "fresh news" that he may drop at a news conference tomorrow..
if he's got a chance to brag about something, he's not shy..
Posted by phuknjrk at April 2, 2007 05:44 PMThis was what I found out about Albright a while back. I believe I pointed out the pertinent text that the talking point came from, though it's been a while since I wrote the darn thing. This campaign was cooked up around February, it looks like, though the papers were written just before the election last year. So, they're still going to try to roll this marketing campaign out, are they?
This was debunked before it was deployed. As for the April date, Christopher, as far as I could dig, the source is supposedly a leak from Russian intelligence. Since when do we believe anonymous sources?
Posted by iamcoyote at April 2, 2007 05:49 PMMore on Dr. Albright here.
Posted by Nobody at April 2, 2007 06:01 PMIn recent testimony to Congress, David Albright said,
"Final Comment: The Danger of Military Action
The pace and scale of Iran’s uranium enrichment effort has been increasing in recent months. The possibility of a preemptive attack by Israel or the United States may increase as the enrichment effort progresses.
ISIS remains concerned about the potential for such an attack. Too often we have heard those in or close to the Bush administration observe that the President does not intend to leave the Iran nuclear issue for the next President. For a number of reasons, but especially due to the dispersed and hardened nature of Iran’s nuclear facilities, an attack is unlikely to be surgical or limited and would constitute an attack against the entire
7
country. As you well know, U.S. military action would also increase the risk of sparking a broader war and undermining U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq. Many military leaders have expressed opposition to the use of military force in Iran, but it is of concern that the Bush administration will pursue a military option nonetheless.
Those supporting a military option may be tempted to generate or accept exaggerated or false claims about Iran’s progress or intentions. This temptation could increase because of the IAEA’s diminished ability to report on the activities at declared sites such as Natanz and provide assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear activities. Thus, Congress, the media, and the public need to be vigilant in ensuring a full, unclassified debate about Iran’s nuclear program and the threat it poses." (emphasis added.)
Unfortunately, Bush&Co does not engage in any full unclassified debate. They work from the dark side only.
The botched US raid that led to the hostage crisis
Posted by T at April 2, 2007 07:41 PMThe real source, the "scientists and diplomats"? David Addington
John Bolton
Barney
So after previously "warning" Bushco about attacking Iran without Congressional approval, Biden is now cheerleading the efforts to "force" Iran to shut down its (legal) nuclear program, including a plan for "hitting" their petroleum industry. Great, that's encouraging.
I guess we now know why Sen. Webb's bill prohibiting an executive branch sustained attack on Iran is bottled-up in Biden's Foreign Relations committee, eh?
Iran's nuclear program is a popular initiative supported by its people. To give it up, they'd have to get something of actual value in return. But Bushco thinks that American firepower and threats can always force others to give us something for nothing. And militarist BushAmerica cheers and hoots its approval, as Biden's comment demonstrates.
Who is the rogue regime here?
Posted by euzoius at April 3, 2007 07:32 AMThis is interesting when you think about the Bush Administration's efforts to move Gonzales's testimony up from the 17th. It could be that this looks too much like "Wag the dog" even for these chumps.
Posted by Philip Wright at April 3, 2007 07:46 AMThe reason for the ABC News Article was to enable a reporter at the Rose Garden at todays News Conference to ask the Commander in Thief a question refering to the ABC News Article to bring up the threat of a Nuclear Bomb in the hands of the Irainians.
People be very afraid was the jist of this news conference!
What wasn't covered was the fact that the failure of Irag is a fait compli and it was his administration that caused it to happen.
Posted by PR at April 3, 2007 07:52 AMI can't tell what was so unexpected about the Iranian developments in the ABC article. As a comment above points out, the Iranians have long been planning to add 3,000 centrifuges. So, are these 1,000 additional ones? Did I miss something?
Posted by anon at April 3, 2007 08:33 AMThe Formula 1 Grand Prix of Bahrain will be held on April 15th. The teams and the gliterati will all leave after the race and be out (town?) by, say 3AM, April 17th. The head cheese of Bahrain would not take it well if their big expensive international sporting event was drowned out by a missile attack from space.
Posted by anon at April 3, 2007 10:19 PM