[Peace-discuss] War with Iran

Tue Jan 9 20:01:34 CST 2007

[Here's an attack on the the administration's plans for Iran from the 
right of the American political spectrum -- not unfortunately from the 
left, where leading Democrats second the administration's position that 
"a nuclear Iran is unacceptable." --CGE]

Who is planning our next war?
By Patrick J. Buchanan
01/09/07 WorldNetDaily

As George Bush reflects on his legacy, an urgent question must be 
pressing in upon him each day. Will I leave here as the man who launched 
failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that cost thousands of U.S. dead, to 
no avail? Or can I yet enter history as the Churchillian statesman who 
used U.S. power to save America and Israel from the mortal threat of 
atomic weapons in the hands of the Iranian mullahs?

Which legacy would Bush prefer? Or Cheney?

As Americans await Bush's address announcing a "surge" of 20,000 to 
30,000 U.S. troops to Iraq, we may be missing the larger picture. The 
War Party is turning its attention from Iraq – to Iran.

Nor is it simply an analysis of the character of George Bush that causes 
one to so conclude.

Tehran is now two weeks into a 60-day deadline to answer a Security 
Council resolution directing it to cease enriching uranium. While the 
sanctions are mild, the resolution passed unanimously and gives Bush the 
U.N. cover he used to wage war on Iraq. If Iran defies the United 
Nations, Bush will demand further sanctions. Up the escalator we go.

Moreover, a second U.S. carrier battle group is heading for the Gulf. 
More interesting, the new CentCom commander, replacing Gen. John 
Abizaid, is no soldier, but Adm. William J. Fallon, commander in chief 
of U.S. forces in the Pacific. What Fallon does not know about securing 
streets, he does know about taking out targets from the air and keeping 
sea lanes open in a time of war.

Bush may be sending signals, but the Israelis are preparing for war. The 
London Sunday Times reports that Israeli pilots have been making the 
2,000-mile run to Gibraltar to train for strikes with bunker-busting 
nuclear bombs on Iran's heavy water plant at Arak, the uranium 
hexaflouride facility at Isfahan and the centrifuge cascade at Natanz.

Israel angrily denies the report. But, on Dec. 30, retired Gen. Oded 
Tira, who headed up all Israeli artillery units, burst into print with 
this admonition:

"As an American air strike in Iran is essential for our existence, we 
must help (Bush) pave the way by lobbying the Democratic Party (which is 
conducting itself foolishly) and U.S. newspaper editors. We need to do 
this in order to turn the Iranian issue to a bipartisan one and 
unrelated to the Iraq failure."

"Bush lacks the political power to attack Iran," writes Tira. Thus, 
Israel and its U.S. lobbying arm "must turn to Hillary Clinton and other 
potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party so that they 
publicly support immediate action by Bush against Iran."

"The Americans must act," Tira concludes. "If they don't, we'll do it 
ourselves ... (and) we must immediately start preparing for an Iranian 
response to an attack."

According to UPI editor-at-large Arnaud De Borchgrave, Tira's line 
tracks the New Year's Day message of Likud superhawk "Bibi" Netanyahu, 
the former prime minister.

Said Netanyahu, Israel "must immediately launch an intense, 
international public relations front first and foremost on the U.S. The 
goal being to encourage President Bush to live up to specific pledges he 
would not allow Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons. We must make 
clear to the (U.S.) government, the Congress and the American public 
that a nuclear Iran is a threat to the U.S. and the entire world, not 
only Israel."

Israel's war, says Bibi, must be sold as America's war.

We are thus forewarned. A propaganda campaign, using Israeli agents and 
their neocon auxiliaries and sympathizers, who stampeded us into war in 
Iraq, is being prepared to stampede us into war on Iran.

We are to be convinced that Iran, with no air force or navy to speak of, 
an economy not 2 percent of ours, which has not started a single war 
since the revolution, 27 years ago, is about to give to terrorists, to 
use on us, a nuclear bomb it may be 10 years away from even being able 
to build.

Will Congress be duped again into giving Bush a blank check for war? Or 
will this new Congress summon the courage to take the war option out of 
Bush's hands, to decide itself, for the nation, when, where and whether 
America should ever go to war against Iran?

Every presidential candidate should be asked: Does President Bush have 
the authority to attack Iran without specific congressional 
authorization? And would you support giving him that authority?

Needed today are courageous men and women of both parties who will 
introduce and pass a congressional resolution stating, "In the absence 
of a direct Iranian attack on U.S. forces or personnel, or an imminent 
threat of such an attack, President Bush has no authority to launch a 
pre-emptive strike or a preventive war on Iran."

If we are going to war, let us do it constitutionally, for once, and not 
leave it up solely to George W. Bush and Brother Cheney.