noworldsystem.com


Iran can be bombed says General Petraeus

Iran can be bombed says General Petraeus

Alex Spillius
London Telegraph
January 11, 2010

The US military commander for the Middle East and the Gulf region has confirmed that the United States has developed contingency plans to deal with Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Gen David Petraeus, head of Central Command or Centcom, did not elaborate on the plans, but said the military has considered the impacts of any action taken there.

Asked about the vulnerability of Iran’s nuclear installations, he told CNN: “Well, they certainly can be bombed. The level of effect would vary with who it is that carries it out, what ordnance they have, and what capability they can bring to bear.”

He added: “It would be almost literally irresponsible if Centcom were not to have been thinking about the various ‘what ifs’ and to make plans for a whole variety of different contingencies.”

Iran maintains its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes, but the United States and other Western nations fear Tehran wants to acquire nuclear weapons.

Israel has called Iran’s nuclear programme the major threat facing its nation. Gen Petraeus declined to comment about Israel’s military capabilities, according to CNN.

Iran had until the end of last year to accept a deal offered five permanent UN Security Council members – Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, plus Germany.

It did not do so. Instead, Tehran gave the West until the end of January to accept its own proposal.

Petraeus said he thought there was still time for the nations to engage Iran in diplomacy, noting there is no deadline on the enactment of any US contingency plans.

But he added that “there’s a period of time, certainly, before all this might come to a head”.

 



Obama Urged to Rally Support for War

Obama Urged to Rally Support for War

Wall Street Journal
September 7, 2009

The White House is facing mounting pressure from lawmakers to work harder to rally flagging public support for the war in Afghanistan.

With casualties rising, the administration is struggling to persuade voters that the war can be won or is worth the human and financial costs. Afghanistan is President Barack Obama’s top foreign-policy priority, but recent polls show that a majority of voters oppose the war for the first time since the conflict began eight years ago.

The politics of the war are getting trickier for key American allies as well. A junior minister in Britain’s Ministry of Defense resigned Thursday, criticizing his government’s strategy in Afghanistan on the eve of a major speech by Prime Minister Gordon Brown about Britain’s efforts there.

In the U.S., a growing number of lawmakers say that Mr. Obama needs to make the case for Afghanistan more forcefully — and more frequently — than he has done to date.

“The president, unfortunately, because of the crush of everything else, hasn’t talked about Afghanistan all that much,” said Sen. Bob Casey, a centrist Democrat from Pennsylvania, in an interview. “There’s so much on his plate that it has an adverse impact on his ability to spend enough time on Afghanistan.”

The president’s most extensive recent comments about Afghanistan came in an Aug. 17 speech to a Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Phoenix, where he devoted less than three minutes of a half-hour speech to a conflict he described as “a war of necessity.” Since then, most of Mr. Obama’s public remarks have focused on health care.

White House officials said there were no plans for Mr. Obama to address the Afghan war in a major speech in the near future. Tommy Vietor, an administration spokesman, said that “the president talks about Afghanistan all the time.”

“There are a lot of critical issues the president deals with every day, and a lot of critical issues he talks about,” Mr. Vietor said. “Afghanistan is on the top of his list.”

Still, a raft of recent polls shows that support for the war is falling rapidly, especially among Mr. Obama’s core Democratic and independent constituencies. A CNN/ORC poll late last month found that 74% of Democrats and 57% of independents opposed the war, dragging overall support for the conflict down to 42%.

The CNN poll found that Republican support for the conflict was holding solid at 70%, highlighting the awkward fact that Mr. Obama’s strongest allies on the war are Republican lawmakers who oppose most other parts of his agenda.

“If the president asks for more troops based on the recommendation of the commanders in the field, I expect virtually every House Republican would support the increase,” said a GOP leadership aide. “This is a fight that will be almost entirely among Democrats.”

Some Republicans say they wish Mr. Obama would make a stronger case for the U.S. role in Afghanistan. Asked recently on CNN’s “State of the Union” whether the president had sufficiently explained U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, Sen. Richard Lugar (R., Ind.) said, “No.”

“The president really has to face the fact that his own leadership here is critical,” said Mr. Lugar, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations panel.

The Afghan war’s shifting political fortunes could make it harder for the administration to sell the public on the need for further expanding the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan.

Mr. Obama has already agreed to send 21,000 American reinforcements, pushing U.S. troop levels there to a record 68,000, and the top American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, is expected to ask for tens of thousands of additional troops later this month.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Robert Gates sounded more amenable to such a request than he has in the past. “I’m very open to the recommendations and certainly the perspective of Gen. McChrystal,” Mr. Gates said.

The White House’s relative silence on Afghanistan comes as a surprise to many military and civilian officials at the Pentagon, who witnessed firsthand in 2007 and 2008 how the Bush administration employed Gen. David Petraeus as an effective public advocate for the Iraq war.

Gen. Petraeus, then the top U.S. commander in Iraq, testified at high-profile congressional hearings and regularly addressed large audiences at think tanks and other public venues.

The appearances helped to shore up flagging congressional support for the Bush administration’s handling of the conflict, and to prevent lawmakers from making a serious push to force a drawdown of troops.

“There’s a blueprint for how to do this,” a senior defense official who began serving in the Pentagon during the Bush administration said in an interview. “The Bush team knew that Petraeus was a great public face for the war, and they put him out there as often as they could.”

A second senior military official said he believed the Obama administration erred earlier this week by failing to publicly release a new strategic assessment of Afghanistan prepared by Gen. McChrystal. The official argued that a public presentation of the new commander’s strategic vision would have helped rally support for the war effort.

“Americans want to see a plan and how we’re going to achieve success,” the official said. “We owe it to them.”

Gen. McChrystal’s gloomy assessment was classified only at the “confidential” level, rather than the more sensitive “secret” or “top secret” classifications, meaning it could have been easily scrubbed for public release.

Mr. Gates told reporters that he was comfortable with the administration’s efforts to rally support for the war, and said Mr. Obama’s public explanations of his strategy for the conflict had been “crystal clear.”

“The nation has been at war for eight years,” he said. “The fact that Americans would be tired of having their sons and daughters at risk and in battle is not surprising.”

Anti-war groups turn against Obama after Afghan surge

 



Obama Demands Money For Pakistan War

Obama administration seeks extraordinary military powers in Pakistan

Bill Van Auken
Uruknet
May 2, 2009

The Obama administration is increasingly treating its growing intervention in Pakistan as a separate counter-insurgency war for which it is demanding the same kind of extraordinary military powers obtained by the Bush administration in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This was the main message delivered by Pentagon officials on Capitol Hill over the last few days, together with increasingly dire warnings that without immediate and unconditional US military funding for Pakistan, the government could collapse.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned Congress Thursday that unless it quickly approved some $400 million requested by the Pentagon for a new Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund the Pakistani military would run out of funding within weeks for its operations against insurgents in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and other areas of western Pakistan.

In his testimony, Gates also revealed that, even after the planned closure of the Guantanamo detention center, the US government may still imprison up to 100 of the inmates without charges or trials. The administration asked Congress for $50 million to build prison facilities in the US for detainees it claims are dangerous but cannot be tried, principally because the supposed evidence against them was extracted through torture.

The proposed $400 million in military aid for Pakistan is part of an $83.5 billion supplemental funding bill requested by Obama, the vast majority of which goes to pay for continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Speaking before the Senate Appropriations Committee, Gates said that the Pentagon was requesting that full control of the military aid be vested with Gen. David Petraeus, the chief of the US military�s Central Command. He claimed that the Pentagon needed “this unique authority for the unique and urgent circumstances we face in Pakistan�for dealing with a challenge that simultaneously requires wartime and peacetime capabilities.”

Some members of Congress have balked at the demand, which echoes the heavy-handed tactics of the Bush administration in demanding immediate passage of military funding for Iraq and Afghanistan with no strings attached.

Read Full Article Here

 



Obama Tried To Stall Iraq Withdrawal

Obama Tried To Stall Iraq Withdrawal

NY Post
September 15, 2008

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops – and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its “state of weakness and political confusion.”

“However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open.” Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is “illegal,” he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the “weakened Bush administration,” Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a “realistic withdrawal date.” They declined.

Obama has made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Supposing he wins, Obama’s administration wouldn’t be fully operational before February – and naming a new ambassador to Baghdad and forming a new negotiation team might take longer still.

By then, Iraq will be in the throes of its own campaign season. Judging by the past two elections, forming a new coalition government may then take three months. So the Iraqi negotiating team might not be in place until next June.

Then, judging by how long the current talks have taken, restarting the process from scratch would leave the two sides needing at least six months to come up with a draft accord. That puts us at May 2010 for when the draft might be submitted to the Iraqi parliament – which might well need another six months to pass it into law

Obama calls for US military draft
http://mparent7777-1.livejournal.com/1726422.html

Biden: Paying higher taxes patriotic for wealthy
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_el_pr/biden_taxes

 



Bush: Iranians Are ‘Assholes’

Bush: Iranians Are ‘Assholes’

Think Progress
September 11, 2008

While serving as CentCom commander between March 2007 and March 2008, Adm. William Fallon consistently pressed the Bush administration for more engagement with Iran and criticized the calls for another war. “This constant drumbeat of conflict is what strikes me which is not helpful and not useful,” Fallon told al Jazeera last year.

In his new book “The War Within,” Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward details a telling White House meeting on Iran in spring 2007 (p. 334):

“I think we need to do something to get engaged with these guys,” Fallon said. Iraq shared a 900-mile border with Iran, and he needed guidance and a strategy for dealing with the Iranians.

“Well,” Bush said, “these are assholes.”

Fallon was stunned. Declaring them “assholes” was not a strategy. Lots of words and ideas were thrown around at the meeting, especially about the Iranian leaders. They were bad, evil, out of touch with their people. But no one offered a real approach.

Fallon’s advocacy for diplomatic engagement irritated administration officials, who were enamored with Gen. David Petraeus. Fallon — a “fan of transition” in Iraq — repeatedly challenged Petraeus’s personnel requests. According to Woodward, the commander was trying to ensure that the United States didn’t “send any more than necessary to the war zone” (p. 343).

In a March interview with Esquire, Fallon said that he was in “hot water” with the White House for meeting with Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak. Fallon noted that such meetings were essential to making sure that regional leaders don’t get “too spun up” by the administration’s war rhetoric. In “The War Within,” Woodward writes that as soon as that article came out, Fallon offered his resignation (pp. 408-9):

Fallon was in Baghdad on March 11 when the article was made public. He realized instantly the uproar it would case. Fallon knew he already was on shaky ground. Days earlier, he had warned Gates that the article was coming. But now he called again.

Read Full Article Here

Recent News:

Russia rejects new measures against Iran
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/080920083335.9s6h11lp.html

Ex-IDF chief: Israel can’t avoid a military confrontation with Iran
http://www.haaretz.com/has..leEn.jhtml?itemNo=1023056

US officer warns Israel not to hit Iran
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl..hit-iran-936178.html

Study: Bombing Iran will take years
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=69956&sectionid=351020104

Ahmadinejad downplays any Israeli strike
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=69804&sectionid=351020104

Expert: Al Qaeda is in league with U.S. against Iran
http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/30296

Iran’s wargames enter new stage
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=69802&sectionid=351020101

Russia: Armed action on Iran unacceptable
http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/09/12/afx5417721.html

Ex-Cheney aide: Bush won’t hit Iran
http://www.jpost.com/servlet..=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Iran starts large-scale Air Force, air defense drills
http://en.rian.ru/world/20080915/116794839.html

Iran: Israel incapable of launching wide-scale war
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3597493,00.html

Israel Waging ‘Secret War With Iran’
US refuses to give Israel bombs fearing Iran strike: report
US to invade Iran any day now?

Coup on Iran & False Flag News Archive

 



No End in Sight – (Iraq war movie)

No End in Sight – (Iraq war movie)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZd5X6k3HhM

 

Petraeus Says He Will Never Declare Iraq Victory

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enpc6_lqw7Y

 



Bush to Shift Troops From Iraq Into Afghanistan

Bush to Shift Troops From Iraq Into Afghanistan

Jon Swaine
London Telegraph
September 9, 2008

President George W Bush is preparing to bolster US troop numbers in Afghanistan using forces freed up from Iraq.

The US will withdraw about 8,000 of its 146,000 soldiers in Iraq by February – and send 4,500 more to join the 33,000 in Afghanistan.

Mr Bush is expected to say in a speech to the US National Defence University that the improved security situation in Iraq will permit a “quiet surge” of troops in Afghanistan in the coming months.

“While the progress in Iraq is still fragile and reversible … there now appears to be a ‘degree of durability’ to the gains we have made,” Mr Bush will say.

However he will state that efforts in Afghanistan must now be ramped up.

“For all the good work we have done in that country, it is clear we must do even more. Unlike Iraq, it has few natural resources and has an underdeveloped infrastructure. Its democratic institutions are fragile,” Mr Bush will explain.

He will make clear that longer-term decisions about the deployments will be left to General David Petraeus, soon to become the Commander of US Central Command, and Mr Bush’s successor as president, who will take office in January.

Read Full Article Here

 

Afghanistan: The Good War?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJVTkIDFQM8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sPZ4A5nY8o

Coup against Iraqi gov’t exposed
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=68816&sectionid=351020201

Millions of Iraqis Uprooted—Media Give Little Coverage of Major Crisis
http://en.epochtimes.com/n2/world/iraq-refugees-displaced-3934.html

16 US troops commit suicide in Iraq
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=68821&sectionid=351020201

US air power triples deaths of Afghan civilians, says report
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/08/afghanistan.usa

New book says U.S. spied on Iraqi leaders
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080905/tpl-uk-bush-iraq-book-4b8df73.html