See other World News Articles
Title: Must Read: Obama advisers discuss preparations for war on Iran
Source:
inteldaily.com
URL Source: http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=144&a=8641
Published: Nov 6, 2008
Author: Peter Symonds
Post Date: 2008-11-08 10:52:16 by bluegrass
Keywords: None
Views: 2632
Comments: 115
On the eve of the US elections, the New York Times cautiously pointed on Monday to the emergence of a bipartisan consensus in Washington for an aggressive new strategy towards Iran. While virtually nothing was said in the course of the election campaign, behind-the-scenes top advisers from the Obama and McCain camps have been discussing the rapid escalation of diplomatic pressure and punitive sanctions against Iran, backed by preparations for military strikes. The article entitled “New Beltway Debate: What to do about Iran” noted with a degree of alarm: “It is a frightening notion, but it not just the trigger-happy Bush administration discussing—if only theoretically—the possibility of military action to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program… [R]easonable people from both parties are examining the so-called military option, along with new diplomatic initiatives.” Behind the backs of American voters, top advisers for President-elect Barack Obama have been setting the stage for a dramatic escalation of confrontation with Iran as soon as the new administration takes office. A report released in September from the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington-based think tank, argued that a nuclear weapons capable Iran was “strategically untenable” and detailed a robust approach, “incorporating new diplomatic, economic and military tools in an integrated fashion”. A key member of the Center’s task force was Obama’s top Middle East adviser, Dennis Ross, who is well known for his hawkish views. He backed the US invasion of Iraq and is closely associated with neo-cons such as Paul Wolfowitz. Ross worked under Wolfowitz in the Carter and Reagan administrations before becoming the chief Middle East envoy under presidents Bush senior and Clinton. After leaving the State Department in 2000, he joined the right-wing, pro-Israel think tank—the Washington Institute for Near East Policy—and signed up as a foreign policy analyst for Fox News. The Bipartisan Policy Center report insisted that time was short, declaring: “Tehran’s progress means that the next administration might have little time and fewer options to deal with this threat.” It rejected out-of-hand both Tehran’s claims that its nuclear programs were for peaceful purposes, and the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate by US intelligence agencies which found that Iran had ended any nuclear weapons program in 2003. The report was critical of the Bush administration’s failure to stop Iran’s nuclear programs, but its strategy is essentially the same—limited inducements backed by harsher economic sanctions and the threat of war. Its plan for consolidating international support is likewise premised on preemptive military action against Iran. Russia, China and the European powers are all to be warned that their failure to accede to tough sanctions, including a provocative blockade on Iranian oil exports, will only increase the likelihood of war. To underscore these warnings, the report proposed that the US would need to immediately boost its military presence in the Persian Gulf. “This should commence the first day the new president enters office, especially as the Islamic Republic and its proxies might seek to test the new administration. It would involve pre-positioning US and allied forces, deploying additional aircraft carrier battle groups and minesweepers, [and] emplacing other war materiel in the region,” it stated. In language that closely parallels Bush’s insistence that “all options remain on the table”, the report declared: “We believe a military strike is a feasible option and must remain a last resort to retard Iran’s nuclear program.” Such a military strike “would have to target not only Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, but also its conventional military infrastructure in order to suppress an Iranian response.” Significantly, the report was drafted by Michael Rubin, from the neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute, which was heavily involved in promoting the 2003 invasion of Iraq. A number of Obama’s senior Democratic advisers “unanimously approved” the document, including Dennis Ross, former senator Charles Robb, who co-chaired the task force, and Ashton Carter, who served as assistant secretary for defense under Clinton. Carter and Ross also participated in writing a report for the bipartisan Center for a New American Security, published in September, which concluded that military action against Iran had to be “an element of any true option”. While Ross examined the diplomatic options in detail, Carter laid out the “military elements” that had to underpin them, including a cost/benefit analysis of a US aerial bombardment of Iran. Other senior Obama foreign policy and defense advisers have been closely involved in these discussions. A statement entitled, “Strengthening the Partnership: How to deepen US-Israel cooperation on the Iranian nuclear challenge”, drafted in June by a Washington Institute for Near East Policy task force, recommended the next administration hold discussions with Israel over “the entire range of policy options”, including “preventative military action”. Ross was a taskforce co-convener, and top Obama advisers Anthony Lake, Susan Rice and Richard Clarke all put their names to the document. As the New York Times noted on Monday, Obama defense adviser Richard Danzig, former navy secretary under Clinton, attended a conference on the Middle East convened in September by the same pro-Israel think tank. He told the audience that his candidate believed that a military attack on Iran was a “terrible” choice, but “it may be that in some terrible world we will have to come to grips with such a terrible choice”. Richard Clarke, who was also present, declared that Obama was of the view that “Tehran’s growing influence must be curbed and that Iran’s acquisition of a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.” While “his first inclination is not to pull the trigger,” Clarke stated, “if circumstances required the use of military force, Obama would not hesitate.” While the New York Times article was muted and did not examine the reports too deeply, writer Carol Giacomo was clearly concerned at the parallels with the US invasion of Iraq. After pointing out that “the American public is largely unaware of this discussion,” she declared: “What makes me nervous is that’s what happened in the run-up to the Iraq war.” Giacomo continued: “Bush administration officials drove the discussion, but the cognoscenti were complicit. The question was asked and answered in policy circles before most Americans know what was happening… As a diplomatic correspondent for Reuters in those days, I feel some responsibility for not doing more to ensure that the calamitous decision to invade Iraq was more skeptically vetted.” The emerging consensus on Iran in US foreign policy circles again underscores the fact that the differences between Obama and McCain were purely tactical. While millions of Americans voted for the Democratic candidate believing he would end the war in Iraq and address their pressing economic needs, powerful sections of the American elite swung behind him as a better vehicle to prosecute US economic and strategic interests in the Middle East and Central Asia—including the use of military force against Iran.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-75) not displayed.
.
.
.
#76. To: bluegrass, cynicom, scrapper2 (#70)
(Edited)
Pray tell, bluegrass, how this differs from American power structure? For all of you who seem to be hung up on Jews, I suggest you come up with a more pertinent, present and less bigoted problem. Everybody's scrapping with everyone else over ancient ethnic or religious differences in the ME. Israel, whose occupation is despicable, btw, is but one issue. I agree that no ME country wants a US military presence, and don't think a training contract is a standing presence in Saudi Arabia (link info on which was not accessible...). Thus we are not present in most places cited. The problem that probably pisses people off more is necessary commerce and business presences the US has foisted of late. We've been engaged in corporate facsim, imo. Using Bush government pressure and the great American marketing machine, we've managed to piss off the world. Hopefully, Obama can calm people down some, get all of us to feel less paranoid and fearful, and hateful... head us more positively, with the wind.
Naive, very naive.
Thanks for your judgment, cynic. Now how about you make some sense? I think you might be surprised at the impact a President can have come February- March, though you might have a problem appreciating that.
I have a Netflix account and was able to watch it online there. Do a google search and see if you can find a place from which to download it. If not, it's available on DVD to purchase.
Regular readers and listeners know I have long contended that the Democruds are more fun than the Republicruds. Sure, Republicruds essentially do the same thing, but so blandly that it looks different. I figure that if you are going to h-e-c-k anyway, you may as well enjoy the trip. Illegal alien-elect Hussein certainly does not disappoint; the only thing I did not expect was that the fun would start so soon. ~Alan Stang
This is your statement not mine. It shows a total lack of understanding of history and current reality. Hoping is for the naive when it comes to politics.
This is a wake up call to anyone who wants to wage war in Afghanistan.
Christine, I don't have netflix or a dvd, but your google suggestion got a bunch of good information. The film is about torture and Geneva convention violations by US actors, not all troops, and not about Afghanistan specifically, correct? It tells me why we should leave, out of shame, but it doesn't tell me how we can leave. I think we're stuck there a while, and while I agree the situation there seems not to have changed in 2000 years, which is probably a good thing..., we should get out asap. I just don't think immediately is possible. The Taliban and al- Qaida must be stopped. Dubya did this too, dammit, with his obsession with Iraq... I'm responding to another post in the thread, I think. Dubya and the Jewish power structure? Nah, Dubya and his neocon company did this to us, stupidly. It was Cheney who said "we have to work the dark side." We've been led astray by damnable fools.
Why are we stuck in a place we have no reason to be in?
Gotta point you back to Dubya on that one. Really bad President, in case you hadn't heard me say that before.
Bush blows, but why stay there is my question.
Salem will tell you Obummer will walk away from Iraq on day one, wont he????
On or about Jan 22, 2009, our troops will begin leaving Iraq. O promised. If they don't, we will launch Operation Return NOW!, right here on 4um.
Excellent idea. Bring home ALL MILITARY from the MIDDLE EAST. Let Israel sink or swim on their own.
Jethro, Whatever was happening there, we broke it and now it's coming back to haunt us. I mean Taliban and al-Qaida. This incredibly stupid President and his bunch managed to mount a war on terror that has been primarily responsible for increasing terrorist numbers. Now we are forced into a position to try and fix that rather than just let it go.
No, he won't. Do you see me to be stupid as well as naive?
Good by me, though by March is ok, too. I don't know where your 1/22 date came from. Did you make that up?
I get that we semi broke it (its never been functional by any reasonable standard) but why stay in support of an unpopular Karzai government? If that puppet can't control the Taliban, or whatever name they go by lately, why waste one drop of American blood in that god forsaken land? But that's the protectionist/isolationist part of me speaking.
Yeah, I did make that date up. Just joking.
Stupid? Your description, not mine. Naivete is a common malady among people that vote on "hope" in politics.
Uh, the Neocons are an aspect of the Jewish power structure. It's hard for some to admit, but some Jews are willing to own it: "If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it." I suspect salem is not a good ole boy.
I reckon you're right.
I disagree, cynicom. Perhaps you are not old enough to have experienced the Ike calm and optimism, or the Kennedy and Johnson enthusiasm, the Reagan revolution? Presidents and their style and focus can most assuredly affect history, and present circumstances, substantially. We're coming off a somewhat sick guy, let's give the new guy a chance.
Ja
Sie sind krank im Kopf.
Are you kidding? Cynicom invented dirt.
Nur der Mad Wunsch nach Macht.
I am a child of the depression, remember it well, pushing 80 years olde, first vote cast was for Ike. Seen a lot of wars, lost family and friends in places we never heard of. Politicians lie, all of them. Hope is for the naive. Delivery is what counts, not more war for whatever reason. Obama is owned and operated just like the rest, he will do as he is told.
Die Wahnsinnigen werden wünschen, dass sie nie geboren waren, bevor es über ist.
I beg your pardon. Who are you to judge that "all" of us have "bigoted" concerns about Israel that have "no pertinence" today? Do you have a PhD in international relations? From what experiential or educational authority do you speak? Listen up, newbie. Most of us, myself included, do not have whispy je ne sais quoi "hang ups" about Israel. What we have, sir, are REAL concerns based on FACTS about Israel's seriously negative influence on our nation's foreign policy in the ME. Why don't you grab yourself a copy of "The Israel Lobby" written by 2 US scholars from U of Chicago and Harvard respectively to bring your touchy feely poorly read self up to speed regarding Israel's deleterious effect on our nation before you spout off nonsense about what you wrongly perceive to be other posters' motivations or their world view.
Now that Obama's fronting for Rahm Emanuel and Co., there's no difference now. If you know anything about the history of the evolution of the Neoconservative movement (which it appears that you don't), you'd be well aware of the differences that used to exist between the Jewish power structure and the American power structure going back to the 1940's. hung up on Jews Please do all of us a favor and attempt to educate yourself before casting aspersions. It only makes you appear ignorant. A good place to start is with a recent review by Kevin MacDonald of Jacob Heilbrunn's book: This piece certainly doesn't help, informationally. Couple guys both seem loony, whacking on Jews and WASPs, never actually drawing a credible neocon thread, at least to the most recent Repuke instantiation... and how do you explain why most US Jews vote Democratic? What would these bozos say about a black, progressive President? I can imagine there might be even more hyperventilation about that. There are maybe 13.5 million Jews in the world, half in the US, five million in Israel. A miniscule population. No wonder we support them. This is not a defense of what Israel is doing. It's the Middle East, and ancient differences run deep. I deplore their occupation, but that is a problem entirely separate from your assertions, such as they are. No Jew I ever knew, including those I've been personally close with, ever presented anything remotely like the threats or the conspiracies you suggest. Here's an aspersion for you, guy: Why don't you just own up to being a bigot?
Interesting.. My Daddy always said 'a bigot is an observant man'..
My understanding is a bigot is a person who has his or her mind made up before observing, and thus any observation is bound to confirm the prejudice....
BWAAAHA! ARF! He's about the only guy on here who understands my surviving Grandfathers [born 1912] euphamisms (Stuff like "Back when Roosevelt stole everybodies gold!") I'm willing to bet he remembers seeing living American Chestnuts east of the Mississipi. He could still get these in change when he was a kid... The world was crazy different when he was born and we'd do ourselves justice to squeeze every last drop of "what it was like" out of him we can!
Bring on the Depression. Bring it the F*** ON! If digging ditches and eating beans for a few years is what it takes for me to see some worthless sacks of crap bankers and politicians living in sack cloth and being spat upon by my fellow Americans well... where's my shovel?!?!
Das wahnsinnig jener Wunsch nachdem Kraftbedürfnis, saldiert zu werden. Gestern.
"Not the victory but the action; Not the goal but the game; In the deed the glory" Dies ist gut Sie ficken zu dumm, Ihren Mund von Ihrem Arschloch zu kennen.
"Not the victory but the action; Not the goal but the game; In the deed the glory" Dies ist gut How do you explain why so many of those same Democratic Jews have remained silent about their Neocon cousins and the "conservative" Israeli lobby in DC? Thankfully, that's slowly beginning to change as younger Jews are coming into their own and see what fucking insane jerks their cousins are. Even if you can't admit it, there are Jews that can: "...Former Congresswoman Holtzman spoke in the morning inside the Synagogue's Beir Chapel. At first I thought we were in for the good old time persecution. She talked about the czar in Russia and her grandfather, she talked about sponsoring legislation to get Nazis when she got into congress. But then came Iraq, and out of nowhere she seized the bull by the horns. "Jews played a critical role in bringing the war about." She spoke of "top level" administration officials and members of Congress. And: “Why was the only country in the world that would welcome George Bush Israel?” There was none of the Jeffrey Goldberg prevarication we usually get, that these Jews just happened to be there. No: They had acted as Jews, and they had made a terrible mistake, Holtzman said, of allowing the ends to justify the means. They thought, “Is this good for the Jews, is this good for Israel …. Is this good for me?" Instead of thinking, "What is the good for society?... What is the good for democracy?" And so at last a prominent Jewish political figure has squarely put PART of the blame for the Iraq war where it belongs: in Zionist feeling within the Jewish community. A deep bow to Elizabeth Holtzman." - link A miniscule population. No wonder we support them. Lame. Using that logic, a gypsy should also be in Obama's White House. Why don't you just own up to being a bigot? Bigot: One strongly loyal to one's own social group, and irrationally intolerant or disdainful of others. That sounds like a Neocon/Zionist/rabbinical student. As the word doesn't describe me, why don't you own up to the fact that you haven't yet broken free of the conditioning that would make you think that Obama's going to change anything, especially WRT foreign policy. If you believe that, you'll believe anything. It's astounding to me that people who will critique (rightfully) nutjob Christians, Muslims, Scientologists, Mormons, etc. will draw the line when someone else rightfully critiques nutjob Jews. It's no more than an attempt to shut down rational thought using words like "bigot", "racist" and the rest of the slogans meant to divert attention from the subject at hand. When the Church had Europe by the throat, criticism was shut down with words like "heretic", "infidel", and the like. Now that Zionism has America by the throat, the same dynamics are in play. The words used are just a little different.
Some people don't want to be observed. ; )
Pronto.
Jewish power structure?
#77. To: salemguy (#76)
#78. To: Cynicom (#77)
(Edited)
Naive, very naive.
#79. To: salemguy (#75)
#80. To: salemguy (#78)
Hopefully, Obama can calm people down some, get all of us to feel less paranoid and fearful, and hateful... head us more positively, with the wind.
#81. To: scrapper2, salemguy, Taxi to the Dark Side (#67)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2987535946644608661
#82. To: christine (#79)
(Edited)
why we should and can leave Afghanistan
#83. To: salemguy (#82)
#84. To: Jethro Tull (#83)
Why are we stuck in a place we have no reason to be in?
#85. To: salemguy (#84)
#86. To: Jethro Tull (#85)
#87. To: Cynicom (#86)
#88. To: Jethro Tull (#87)
On or about Jan 22, 2009, our troops will begin leaving Iraq. O promised. If they don't, we will launch Operation Return NOW!, right here on 4um.
#89. To: Jethro Tull (#85)
Bush blows, but why stay there is my question.
#90. To: Cynicom (#86)
Salem will tell you Obummer will walk away from Iraq on day one, wont he????
#91. To: Jethro Tull (#87)
On or about Jan 22, 2009, our troops will begin leaving Iraq. O promised. If they don't, we will launch Operation Return NOW!, right here on 4um.
#92. To: salemguy (#89)
#93. To: salemguy (#91)
#94. To: salemguy (#90)
stupid as well as naive?
#95. To: salemguy (#82)
Dubya and the Jewish power structure? Nah, Dubya and his neocon company did this to us, stupidly.
#96. To: bluegrass, salemguy (#95)
Uh, the Neocons are an aspect of the Jewish power structure.
#97. To: Cynicom (#96)
#98. To: Cynicom (#80)
Hopefully, Obama can calm people down some, get all of us to feel less paranoid and fearful, and hateful... head us more positively, with the wind.
#99. To: bluegrass (#97)
#100. To: salemguy (#98)
We're coming off a somewhat sick guy, let's give the new guy a chance.
#101. To: salemguy, Cynicom (#98)
Perhaps you are not old enough...
#102. To: Beendigen Sie die Kommunisten (#100)
#103. To: salemguy (#98)
I disagree, cynicom. Perhaps you are not old enough
#104. To: bluegrass (#102)
#105. To: salemguy, bluegrass, cynicom, All (#76)
For all of you who seem to be hung up on Jews, I suggest you come up with a more pertinent, present and less bigoted problem. Everybody's scrapping with everyone else over ancient ethnic or religious differences in the ME. Israel, whose occupation is despicable, btw, is but one issue.
#106. To: salemguy, scrapper2, Cynicom (#76)
Pray tell, bluegrass, how this differs from American power structure?
#107. To: bluegrass (#106)
It only makes you appear ignorant.
#108. To: salemguy, bluegrass (#107)
Why don't you just own up to being a bigot?
#109. To: Lady X (#108)
(Edited)
'a bigot is an observant man'
#110. To: bluegrass, salemguy, Cynicom (#101)
Are you kidding? Cynicom invented dirt.
#111. To: bluegrass (#102)
Nur der Mad Wunsch nach Macht.
#112. To: salemguy (#109)
My understanding is a bigot is a person who has his or her mind made up before observing, and thus any observation is bound to confirm the prejudice....
#113. To: salemguy (#107)
how do you explain why most US Jews vote Democratic?
#114. To: Lady X, salemguy (#108)
My Daddy always said 'a bigot is an observant man'..
#115. To: Beendigen Sie die Kommunisten (#111)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest