noworldsystem.com

UK On Board For U.S. Iran Strike

Telegraph
October 07, 2007

British defence officials have held talks with their Pentagon counterparts about how they could help out if America chose to bomb Iran.

Washington sources say that America has shelved plans for an all-out assault, drawn up to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities and take out the Islamist regime.

The Sunday Telegraph has learned that President Bush’s White House national security council is discussing instead a plan to launch pinpoint attacks on bases operated by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds force, blamed for training Iraqi militants.

Pentagon officials have revealed that President Bush won an understanding with Gordon Brown in July that Britain would support air strikes if they could be justified as a counter-terrorist operation.

Since then discussions about what Britain might contribute militarily, to combat Iranian retaliation that would follow US air strikes, have been held between ministers and officials in the Pentagon and the Ministry of Defence.

Vincent Cannistraro — who served as intelligence chief on Ronald Reagan’s National Security Council and then as head of operations for the CIA’s counter-terrorist centre — said: “What’s on the table right now is tactical strikes.”

Last night, Downing Street declined to comment on the suggestion. But Mr Cannistraro has talked about the preparations to senior Pentagon officials and with military and intelligence contacts in the UK. He said: “The British Government is in accord with plans to launch limited strikes on facilities inside Iran, on the basis of counter-terrorism.” While the US Air Force and naval jets could carry out raids without help from the RAF, the Pentagon is keen to have the Royal Navy’s cooperation in the event of an attack, to prevent Iran from sowing mines in the Gulf to block oil exports in retaliation.

Mr Cannistraro said: “The British have to be a major auxiliary to this plan. It’s not just for political reasons: the US doesn’t have a lot of mine clearing capability in the Gulf. The Dutch and the British do.

“There will be renewed discussions with British defence officials about what role Britain would perform in the naval sphere. If there was a retaliatory response by the Iranians, they might close the Straits of Hormuz and that would affect the entire West.”

The White House and Downing Street would justify such an attack as a defensive move to protect allied troops in Iraq. But moderates in the US government are concerned that the counter-terrorist argument may be used by hawks as a figleaf for military action that could escalate into all out war with Iran.

A US intelligence source said that Revolutionary Guard bases, supply depots and command and control facilities “have been programmed” into military computers but stressed that President Bush has not given any “execute order” for military action.

Further details of the US plans for Iran were divulged to Seymour Hersh, the investigative reporter with the New Yorker magazine who has unveiled Pentagon secrets for more than three decades.

American officials told the New Yorker: “During a secure video conference earlier this summer, the President told Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador to Iraq, that he was thinking of hitting Iranian targets across the border and that the British ‘were on board’.”

The magazine added: “The bombing plan has had its most positive reception from the new government of Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown.”

A recently retired American four-star general, told the magazine last week that the bombing campaign would only attract support from the Prime Minister “if it’s in response to an Iranian attack” like the kidnapping of British sailors in March.

The general said the US officials want to strike “if the Iranians stage a cross-border attack inside Iraq” of a significant kind, for example the one that produced “10 dead American soldiers and four burned trucks”.

Britain and America have complained for months about Iranian support for Iraqi militants but Pentagon officials claim that Iran has been told that a line has now been drawn in the sand — a move that has actually helped to stabilise the situation. Details of the US plans were passed to Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iranian diplomats by Mr Crocker and Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister, during bilateral talks this summer.

Since then, US officials say there appears to have been a reduction in some of the arms shipments and support to militia elements in Iraq.

Some British military and intelligence figures fear that any endorsement of US plans, however hypothetical, will only embolden the White House faction, led by Vice-President Dick Cheney, which wants major bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser to former President Carter, said last week the Bush plan was to depict any air strike on Iran as “responding to what is an intolerable situation. This time, unlike the attack in Iraq, we’re going to play the victim.”

Fineman: Intel Community To Release ‘Three Iran Reports’ To ‘Slow Down’ Bush’s Warmongering

Think Progress
October 08, 2007

On the Chris Matthews Show today, NBC’s Howard Fineman revealed that the intelligence community will release “three different reports” in upcoming weeks to “slow down” the administration’s current drumbeat for war with Iran:

The intelligence community over the next few months is going to come out with three different reports on Iran about internal political problems of Iran, about the economy, and about their nuclear capability.

Those are going to be key to decide what the Bush administration is going to do, and it’s the intelligence community I think trying to slow down what the president, most particularly the vice president, want to do in Iran.

Watch it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mluky7X04y4

The intelligence community’s warning against war with Iran echo its warnings prior to the invasion of Iraq. Pre-war intelligence forewarned that occupying Iraq could be a “long, difficult and probably turbulent challenge” and would “accelerate” regional terrorism.

Similarly, the administration “ignore[d] the intelligence community’s belief that the militant Islamist al-Qaida and Saddam’s secular dictatorship were unlikely allies,” instead setting up an “alternative intelligence” shop to disseminate false information about Hussein. Mohamad El Baradei of the International Atomic Energy Agency has also warned that pre-Iraq failures are being repeated with respect to Iran.

Related News:

Gordon Brown ‘will back air strikes on Iran’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessi..T….07/wiran107.xml

Bush says possible US Iran attack ’empty propaganda’
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Bush_says_possible_US_Iran_attack_1007.html

Iran says oilfields ‘too attractive’ for France to quit
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/071006162022.ietmid6j.html

Petraeus steps up accusations against Iran
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO….?pageNumber=3

Iran warns France over nuclear stance
http://www.spacewar.com/2006/071007105959.j5fyosiu.html

Who Wants to Bomb Iran? Democrats, Not Republicans, Says Seymour Hersh
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener/….b_67229.html

FBI offered me $4m: Lockerbie bomb witness
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1597732007

Bush determined to confront Iran’s nuclear ambitions
Israeli raid caused electronic disruption over wide areas of Syria
We have no plans to attack Iran: Bush
Brown accused of backing U.S. plans for bombing raids on Iran
The fallout from an attack on Iran would be devastating
Iraq Redux: Bush Thinks God is Telling Him to Invade Iran
Prominent Americans Ask Military To Refuse To Attack Iran
US ‘must break Iran and Syria regimes’
Byrd: Senate’s ‘Saber-Rattling’ Is ‘Sleep-Walking’ America To War With Iran
War With Iran? Who Decides?
Bush’s Agenda in Iran
Fake Al-Qaeda Tape Says Bin Laden Alive
Australia: We Won’t Follow US Into Iran
Mike Gravel Says AIPAC Is Pushing Confrontation With Iran
Mottaki says U.S. can’t start war against Iran
US gearing up for war with Iran, despite denials
More Disasterous Iran Legislation On Its Way
Israel admits air strike on Syria
Neocons Told to Look for Reasons to Attack Iran
U.S. Trains Gulf Air Force For War With Iran
Bolton: Attack Iran, ‘remove’ its leader
Hersh: Bush, Cheney ‘really want’ Iran war
Israel Foreign Min Calls For Urgent UN Action Against Iran
Bolton: We Should Carry Out Regime Change In Iran Because ‘It Did Work In Iraq’
Bolton calls for bombing of Iran
I hate all Iranians, Bush aide tells MPs
Israeli airstrike hit military site, Syria confirms
Neocon “Freedom’s Watch” Spends Big Bucks to Push Attack Iran Agenda
Hersh: ‘War with Iran will be about protecting the troops in Iraq’
Syrian ‘research station’ says shocked to hear of attack on its facility
Mike Gravel Grills Hillary for Supporting Iran War Amendment
Hillary Prods Bush to Go After Iran
Right-Wing New York Sun Declares: ‘Attack On Iran Said To Be Imminent’
‘Combat Outpost Shocker:’ The base that could spark Iran conflict
Debunking the Neocons’ Iran War Measure
Fox Pushes Attacking Iran While its “Business News” Anchor Lies About a Surge in Oil Prices Due to That Very Fear
BREAKING: Lieberman-Kyl’s Iran amendment passes
Durbin: Lieberman-Kyl Amendment Is ‘Dangerous,’ ‘Puts Us On Record’ In Support Of Iran War
CFR’s Hart Suggests False Flag Event For Iran War
Clinton supports Israeli ‘strike’ on Syria
Military Opens Camp on Iranian Border
Newt Gingrich: Bush Should Blow Up Iran’s Natural Gas Insfrastructure
Ex-Cheney Adviser Denies Trying To Stir War With Iran