Netanyahu Pounds War Drums

Peacenik think these people are insane. Totally insane. But Peacenik also thought all the idiots banging the drums for war with Iraq were insane as well. All Netanyahu needs is a couple of front page stories in the New York Times about toy planes that could deliver a non-existent bomb to New York, and maybe some talk about killing them there so you don't have to kill them here, and there will be war mania. In the meantime, could someone refresh everyone's memory about the consequences of war with Iran. It would be an express trip back to the 15th Century for the world.

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a session of the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, in Jerusalem

WASHINGTON - Less than a week after Republicans made major gains in the U.S. midterm elections, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has called on President Barack Obama to "create a credible threat of military action" against Iran.

Initial official reaction was negative, with Defence Secretary Robert Gates insisting that Obama's preferred strategy of enhanced multilateral sanctions and negotiations, which may resume after a year's hiatus later this month, was working better than expected.

"I disagree that only a credible military threat can get Iran to take the actions that it needs, to end its nuclear weapons programme," Gates said when asked about Netanyahu's remarks during a visit in Australia.

"We are prepared to do what is necessary, but at this point, we continue to believe that the political, economic approach that we are taking is, in fact, having an impact in Iran.

Read on...

GOP Senator: US Needs to 'Neuter' Iran Sends ripples through an international audience in Halifax

Can there be any doubt that the U.S. is a rogue state? Threatening a sovereign state with neutering. This is warmongering, plain and simple. The international community has to bring pressure to bear to get the U.S. to stand down. The U.S. needs to stop destabilizing the world. Peacenik thinks sanctions may be in order. All options should be on the table.

US Senator Lindsey Graham sent ripples through an international audience Saturday saying his country should be prepared to launch a military attack on Iran that would "neuter" the country. (AFP/Mandel Ngan)

HALIFAX, Nova Scotia -- A U.S. lawmaker sent ripples through an international audience Saturday saying his country should be prepared to launch a military attack on Iran that would "neuter" the hard line regime.

But Defense Minister Peter MacKay, who was in attendance, said a military attack on Iran would have negative fallout, and that international sanctions are preferable.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said Saturday his party would support military action against Iran that would destroy its ability to fight back while allowing its people to rise up.

Graham surprised attendees at the Halifax International Security Forum with his hawkish rhetoric, saying an attack could cripple Iran's nuclear program as well as its armed forces.

Read on...

Chomsky: Is the U.S. Gearing Up for the Destruction of Iran?

Iran sits at the top of US concerns about keeping control of Middle East oil-producing regions, preparing for serious violence if other means do not suffice.

The dire threat of Iran is widely recognized to be the most serious foreign policy crisis facing the Obama administration. General Petraeus informed the Senate Committee on Armed Services in March 2010 that "the Iranian regime is the primary state-level threat to stability" in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility, the Middle East and Central Asia, the primary region of US global concerns. The term "stability" here has its usual technical meaning: firmly under US control.

In June 2010 Congress strengthened the sanctions against Iran, with even more severe penalties against foreign companies. The Obama administration has been rapidly expanding US offensive capacity in the African island of Diego Garcia, claimed by Britain, which had expelled the population so that the US could build the massive base it uses for attacks in the Central Command area. The Navy reports sending a submarine tender to the island to service nuclear-powered guided-missile submarines with Tomahawk missiles, which can carry nuclear warheads. Each submarine is reported to have the striking power of a typical carrier battle group. According to a US Navy cargo manifest obtained by the Sunday Herald (Glasgow), the substantial military equipment Obama has dispatched includes 387 "bunker busters" used for blasting hardened underground structures. Planning for these "massive ordnance penetrators," the most powerful bombs in the arsenal short of nuclear weapons, was initiated in the Bush administration, but languished. On taking office, Obama immediately accelerated the plans, and they are to be deployed several years ahead of schedule.

Read on...

Peacenik goes back and forth on this issue. Peacenik recently read something about Europe not allowing the U.S. or Israel to attack Iran. On the other hand there are lots and lots of influential Americans who would love to attack Iran. Is Iran a threat to the U.S.? No. Was Iraq a threat to the U.S.? No. Was Afghanistan a threat to the U.S.? No. Can Europe influence U.S. foreign policy? No. Will Iran be attacked?

Scary Anti-Iran Talk Is Escalating -- And Weapons May Be Moving Into Position for Attack

Though Iran does not have nuclear capability, the U.S. and Israel are espousing a doctrine of "pre-emption."

Crazy talk about the Middle East seems to be escalating, backed up by some pretty ominous military deployments. We'll start with the department of scary statements:

First up, Shabtai Shavit, former chief of the Israeli spy agency Mossad, speaking June 21 at Bar Ilan University, Tel Aviv on why Israel should launch a pre-emptive strike at Iran: “I am of the opinion that, since there is an ongoing war, since the threat is permanent, since the intention of the enemy in this case is to annihilate you, the right doctrine is one of presumption and not retaliation.”

Second up, Uzi Arad, Israeli prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s national security advisor, speaking before the Jewish Agency in Jerusalem June 22 on his belief that the “international community” would support an Israeli strike at Iran: “I don’t see anyone who questions the legality of this or the legitimacy.”

Read on...

Will Iran be attacked? Would the Peace Prize winning Obama authorize an attack? Peacenik doesn't know. But with the world economy going down the toilet, leaders everywhere will be looking to divert attention. An attack on Iran would not surprise Peacenik.

The media and the warmongering scale

Whats the media saying about Iran today? Is it balanced? Is it fair? Is it true? Does it advance the cause of peace?

Peacenik took a quick spin through a few websites. This is what Peacenik found.

Cripple Iran to save it

This gem is written by none other that Dick Cheney's former national security adviser. The title says it all. And he is serious. No irony intended. And this appears in the Los Angles Times. 10 out of 10 on warmongering scale.

Next Peacenik visited the New York Times.

Some See Iran as Ready for Nuclear Deal

This story rehashes the nuclear story. It does quote intelligence reports saying Iran is working on building a bomb. But at least it mentions a possible deal. This one is only 7 out 10 on the warmongering scale.

The Washington Post has a small story today.

How to Engage Iran

Curious title considering the conclusion is to not shake had with a man with blood on his hands. 8 out of 10 on the warmongering scale.

Last stop the Jerusalem Post.

'Israel may attack Iran after December'

What can you say? 10 out of 10 on the warmongering scale.

So there you have a quick scan of the mainstream media. A good day for warmongerers.

U.S. Story on Iran Nuke Facility Doesn't Add Up

punditman says...It goes without saying that things are not always as they appear to be, especially when it comes to the byzantine world of US-Iranian relations. But for those naive enough to think the Obama administration does not play loose with the truth just like the Bush administration, punditman said it anyway. Try weeding your way through the article below, dear readers. It's dense. Has peacenik found a used bomb shelter yet?

Analysis by Gareth Porter

WASHINGTON, Sep 29 (IPS) - The story line that dominated media coverage of the second Iranian uranium enrichment facility last week was the official assertion that U.S. intelligence had caught Iran trying to conceal a "secret" nuclear facility.

But an analysis of the transcript of that briefing by senior administration officials that was the sole basis for the news stories and other evidence reveals damaging admissions, conflicts with the facts and unanswered questions that undermine its credibility.

Iran's notification to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the second enrichment facility in a letter on Sep. 21 was buried deep in most of the news stories and explained as a response to being detected by U.S. intelligence. In reporting the story in that way, journalists were relying entirely on the testimony of "senior administration officials" who briefed them at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh Friday.

U.S. intelligence had "learned that the Iranians learned that the secrecy of the facility was compromised", one of the officials said, according to the White House transcript. The Iranians had informed the IAEA, he asserted, because "they came to believe that the value of the facility as a secret facility was no longer valid..."

Keep Reading...

Keeping Iran honest

punditman says...
Is Iran close to having nukes? Are they the new Soviets? Is it time for Peacenik to start looking for an old bomb shelter on Kijiji? You may think so if you've been taken in by the media's hype and half-truths regarding the current state of Iran's nuclear energy program and the apparent "discovery" of the Qom nuclear plant. But punditman says not so fast, doomers.

First, get the facts. Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter knows a thing or two about inspections regimes, their legal rigamarole and the politics that can accompany them. He saw the lies coming out of the US and Britain before the Iraq War was launched under false pretenses, and he sees what is happening now with regard to Iran. Says Ritter, "Simply put, Iran is no closer to producing a hypothetical nuclear weapon today than it was prior to Obama's announcement concerning the Qom facility." For instance, how many people reading this post know that Iran declared the Qom nuclear facility to the IAEA several days before Obama's announcement last week?

Punditman says forget the corporate media. They distort, deceive, dumb-down and deflect. Read Scott Ritter instead. Wait, the Guardian is corporate...Well, read on anyway...

Iran's secret nuclear plant will spark a new round of IAEA inspections and lead to a period of even greater transparency

It was very much a moment of high drama. Barack Obama, fresh from his history-making stint hosting the UN security council, took a break from his duties at the G20 economic summit in Pittsburgh to announce the existence of a secret, undeclared nuclear facility in Iran which was inconsistent with a peaceful nuclear programme, underscoring the president's conclusion that "Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow".

Obama, backed by Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy, threatened tough sanctions against Iran if it did not fully comply with its obligations concerning the international monitoring of its nuclear programme, which at the present time is being defined by the US, Britain and France as requiring an immediate suspension of all nuclear-enrichment activity.

The facility in question, said to be located on a secret Iranian military installation outside of the holy city of Qom and capable of housing up to 3,000 centrifuges used to enrich uranium, had been monitored by the intelligence services of the US and other nations for some time. But it wasn't until Monday that the IAEA found out about its existence, based not on any intelligence "scoop" provided by the US, but rather Iran's own voluntary declaration. Iran's actions forced the hand of the US, leading to Obama's hurried press conference Friday morning.

Beware politically motivated hype. While on the surface, Obama's dramatic intervention seemed sound, the devil is always in the details. The "rules" Iran is accused of breaking are not vague, but rather spelled out in clear terms. In accordance with Article 42 of Iran's Safeguards Agreement, and Code 3.1 of the General Part of the Subsidiary Arrangements (also known as the "additional protocol") to that agreement, Iran is obliged to inform the IAEA of any decision to construct a facility which would house operational centrifuges, and to provide preliminary design information about that facility, even if nuclear material had not been introduced. This would initiate a process of complementary access and design verification inspections by the IAEA.

Keep Reading...

Canada set to boycott Iran's UN speech

Peacenik says: Yawn....who cares?

By Steven Edwards, Canwest News ServiceSeptember 23, 2009

Canada will boycott Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech at the United Nations today, saying his outbursts about the Holocaust and Israel are "shameful."

Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon will be at the world body to attend the opening of the UN General Assembly's annual debate, but officials signal he and other members of the Canadian delegation will vacate when the Islamic republic's president approaches the podium.

Walking out of the chamber is seen as a strong diplomatic show of disgust at the UN -- and since the 192-member chamber is generally packed on the first day of the annual summit, Canada's empty seats will not go unnoticed.

Read on...

The full US/UK spin on events in Iran

punditman says...What's happening with the domestic Iranian situation lately? Seems to have fallen off the radar these past few days. I think.
Punditman came across an interesting bit of analysis over at Joe Bageant's website, and Joe has been kind enough to allow me to republish, in full, his correspondence with one of his readers on the situation. Punditman didn't ask for Matt's permission (the emailer), but presumably Matt, a self-described "fellow working class (landscaper) lefty in dying rust belt Michigan," doesn't mind a little web fame. Punditman is in agreement with the general ideas contained in the exchange. Are you?

(email sent on June 28, 2009)

Hi Joe,

Am I the only one not celebrating the violent turmoil and chaos in Iran? To me it has the same feel as the phony "color revolutions" that were engineered by the "National Endowment for Democracy", a benign sounding organization that in fact masks a cadre of spooks working to enrich corporate interests by destabilizing governments that don't toe the neo-liberal corporate globalist line.

It appears very much like the neo-cons on the march again, only this time the well meaning naïve "liberals" aren't going to say anything about U.S. imperialism because they are entranced by the super slick public relations machine Obama has. This worries me because at least Bush was awkward enough that many people could see through his malicious schemes, it seems this time around that 90% of the population is going to swallow the endless imperialist interventionist Kool-Aid.

I voted for Obama, and now I very much feel I owe Cynthia McKinney a giant apology.

In your opinion, am I onto something here, or have I read one too many "conspiracy" books? It's very lonely questioning both the "left" and "right" on their celebrations of Iran's nascent uprising, but something just doesn't feel right about it to me, it feels too slick and well timed to be a true spontaneous uprising against the admittedly somewhat odious Ahmadinejad.

Sincerely,

Matt,
a fellow working class (landscaper) lefty in dying rust belt Michigan

------

Matt,

I too suspect the US propaganda machine at work here. Some native Iranian friends tell me the incumbent could very well have won the election because he has massive support from people outside the two major cities -- that millions of Iranians live on farms, in villages and large towns we've never heard of, and support Mahmoud Ahmadinejad because he has built roads, health clinics and infrastructure in rural and village areas. They tend to be conservative and more religious, like our heartland American voters that got Bush elected.

In Tehran and Mashhad more people tend to be educated in the western sense, especially the women, and wish for more western style civil liberties. However, these cities are also home to most conservative Muslim immigrants to Iran. One Iranian woman here, married to an American, said she thought Ahmadinejad probnably won (and she dislikes the guy) but the stupid fucking system overstated the margins way too far because, like all theocratic states, they just don't get it asbout the democratic process, just don't know when to quit.

So I dunno. And truthfully, I do not care at this point. Just as the average Iranian doesn't think much about the US, (despite what we are told) I don't think much about Iran -- despite that the media yabbering antagonistically in both countries. We are are among the little guys of the world, misled by the big guys, and much too busy with the struggles of daily life to obsess on political details and day to day machinations of the powerful. I am more concerned with my own people, not the "American people," but the plain old working human beings in this country, and their fate, and global solidarity among them.

One thing for sure, we're getting the full US/UK spin on events that are much more complicated than we are led to believe. For instance, the so-called "Twitter Revolution," wherein Twitter was supposed to have brought hundreds of thousands together in the demonstrations. According to communications researchers, There were less than 1000 Twitter communications during the mass demonstrations, and most of them were the same silly shit we see here. Doubtlessly our agents there are at work, doncha think? Just as theirs must be at work here in some dark corners of the Empire. Or maybe openly in certain mosques.

Anyway, I think nearly all the world's governments are corrupt (some just give the people more for their money), so I'm never much interested in the official version of anyone's news. Including ours.

In art and labor,

Joe

Clinton: US Won’t Hesitate to Use Military Against Iran

punditman says...She's at it again. Everyone's favourite iron lady. As the article notes, the IAEA has pointed out no evidence for the accusation exists, and America’s own National Intelligence Estimate says they don’t believe Iran has an active weapons program either. But facts don't matter. Hilary wants to kick some mullah butt and most sheeple will go along with it, because they are too lazy and stupid to look into issues past the shallow, biased, sycophantic reporting in the mainstream media. Damn, I feel like I'm in a worse mood than Peacenik today. But at least I didn't swear.

Not a Threat, It's a Promise, Secretary of State Tells CFR

In a high-profile policy address before the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared that the US wouldn’t not hesitate to use its military to “defend our friends, our interests, and above all, our people” during the segment discussing Iran.

She elaborated on the declaration with “this is not an option we seek nor is it a threat; it is a promise.” Clinton also warned Iran that the US offer to hold talks, which she had previously said she didn’t expect to work to begin with, would not be open-ended and that “our willingness to talk is not a sign of weakness.”

Today’s comments are the latest in a long line of bellicose rhetoric coming from the Secretary of State. Last month during a television interview she said that Iran was risking the possibility of a US invasion, citing the disastrous 2003 invasion of Iraq as a model.

Keep Reading...

Tehran Street Photos – “The Genie is Out of the Bottle”

Here are some pics from Iran. Looks like the protests may not be over. Here is the link to more pics. Peacenik

by Al Rodgers

Share this on Twitter - Tehran Street Photos – “The Genie is Out of the Bottle”

Thu Jul 09, 2009 at 02:53:43 PM PDT

Obama: 'Absolutely' no green light for Israel to attack Iran

Peacenik wonders what goes through Joe Biden's skull some days. Peacenik read Biden's interview on the weekend when Biden appeared to give Israel the green light to attack Iran. Now Obama says no way. Peacenik doesn't know who to believe. Correction. Peacenik doesn't believe either of them. Debating something that should be sacrosanct creates the possibility that it might happen. There should be no debate about the wisdom of starting World War Three. But idiots govern the world.

JPost.com

US President Barack Obama strongly denied that the United States had given Israel an approval to strike Iran's nuclear facilities, in an interview given to CNN television on Tuesday.
US President Barack Obama...

Asked by the network whether Washington had given Israel a green light to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, Obama answered: "Absolutely not."

In the interview, which was broadcast from Russia, where Obama is on an official visit, he added: "We can't dictate to other countries what their security interests are.

Read on...

Time for an Israeli Strike?

As if the Washington Post and the New York Times didn't do enough to push the Iraq war, we now have the Post giving column inches to John Bolton the crazy former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. By the way, Bolton was never confirmed by the Senate, Bush had to use a recess appointment to get him the job.

Bolton always wants to attack Iran, and in this goofy essay he suggests that after the attack a public diplomacy campaign could be successfully directed at the Iranian's currently risking their lives to protest the elections. That is the few who survive. Peacenik is sure a public diplomacy campaign waged in the midst of nuclear fallout would work just fine.

By John R. Bolton
Thursday, July 2, 2009

With Iran's hard-line mullahs and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps unmistakably back in control, Israel's decision of whether to use military force against Tehran's nuclear weapons program is more urgent than ever.

Iran's nuclear threat was never in doubt during its presidential campaign, but the post-election resistance raised the possibility of some sort of regime change. That prospect seems lost for the near future or for at least as long as it will take Iran to finalize a deliverable nuclear weapons capability.

Read on...

Iran Open Thread: Government Continues Brutal Crackdown

Peacenik thinks the only thing left to be decided in Iran is whether or not the status quo can be maintained. And Peacenik thinks the status quo has been shattered. Yes the government may be able to retain power. But the government's knowledge and the people's knowledge, and the world's knowledge that a huge groundswell of opposition to the present regime exists has forever changed the dynamics.

There will be repression, and murder, and mayhem, but the illusion of control is gone. The protesters have won. How their victory plays out though is still up in the air. But Peacenik thinks a majority of Iran is sick of living in a theocracy. The victory is that simple. Peacenik looks forward to the day when the majority of the U.S. is sick of living in a kleptocracy. It can happen.

by Zoltan

Thu Jun 25, 2009 at 09:46:26 PM PDT

Iran is rapidly fading from the public consciousness. Two high profile celebrity deaths, of course, will drown out all significant news in the corporate media for some time to come (and to some extent even on the blogs - three recommended diaries on the deaths in one day here, for example). The Irani government has been increasinlgy more successful in creating a media blackout, which is also contributing to the general loss of interest that seems to be taking place in the West.

But I would like to keep the discussion about Iran going. Please post news, thoughts, and analysis.

I have a few thoughts of my own below the fold.

Nico Pitney has changed his link:

Nico Pitney at the Huffington Post

And a link to Sullivan, who is still devoting a lot of his blog to Iran:

Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish

Read on...

No option but to engage the Iranian regime

punditman says...
This is something Punditman has been saying for quite sometime: some of the very same people who are pretending to stand up for the Iranian protestors are often the same ones who would not want to take them in as political refugees and who would be the first to support initiating war against them. In other words, the very people they are pretending to defend are the ones that would be killed. Can you say hypocrites? Punditman can.

by Haroon Siddiqui

Given the unprecedented events of the last two weeks, what lies ahead for Iran – domestically and internationally?

Let's begin with ourselves. How many Iranian refugees are we willing to accept in Canada? After the 1956 Hungarian uprising, Canada took in 37,000 refugees. After the 1968 Prague spring, we took in 12,000. On a proportionate basis, we'd be taking between 78,000 and 240,000 Iranians.

How many hands do I see raised?

Keep Reading...

Claims of student massacre in Tehran spread

punditman says...Post-election Iran: chaos, rioting, repression, instability, complexity. Thankfully, award-winnning journalist Robert Fisk always manages to be where the action is in the middle east. He points out that half of Iran's population is under 25 and 60 per cent of Iran's women have higher education and that much of the agitation for reform in Iran lately has been coming from youth and women.

Is this rigged election the spark that will create another Iranian revolution? Millions are demonstrating against a fraudulent election. Yesterday Punditman made a comment that these are the very people that an Israel/US attack would be killing. This is a story that continues to unfold.

By Robert Fisk

Tehran University looked as calm as any summer campus. So much for the latest rumours of a bloodbath. Another piece of Iranian fiction, served up on YouTube. Scarved female students were moving through the university's great black iron gates. I asked my driver, Ali, to drop me off at the corner so I could prowl the college bookshops on Engelob Street, I was looking for a volume of modern Persian poetry for a friend. I did not at first hear the man at the cash desk, motioning out the door.

I peered out. The gates of the university were now shut. Behind them was a crowd of hundreds of young men and women, many wearing scarves over their mouths. I crossed the road. And the banners behind those forbidding gates told a frightening story. "Today is a day of mourning," one of them read. "Dignified students are mourners today." "Police, shame on you, shame on you." "Tell my mother – she doesn't have a son any more."

I walked up to the gate. Young female students were crying. So were some of the young men. "We don't want a government by coup," another poster read. "Tehran University dormitory has been coloured with students' blood," another said.

Keep Reading...

Clinton Threatens to Attack Iran ‘The Way That We Did’ Iraq

punditman says...Thanks Hilary. Is this the new beginning with the Muslim world that your boss Obama was calling for last week? Can someone tell punditman exactly what is going on inside the Obama cabinet when it comes to the middle east? Given the facts as they are known, any first strike on Iran would be based on lies, half-truths and distortions.

by Jason Ditz
http://news.antiwar.com

Citing the disastrous 2003 US invasion of Iraq as an example, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today warned that by continuing to refuse to abandon its civilian nuclear program, Iran was risking the possibility of an invasion by the US or “some other enemy that would do that to them.”

The comments came during an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program, and when asked by interviewer and former Clinton-era official George Stephanopoulus, Secretary Clinton reiterated “that’s right, as a first strike.”

The bulk of the interview emphasized US opposition to the Iranian program, along with unquestioned claims that the nation was pursuing nuclear weapons. Secretary Clinton also extended the American nuclear umbrella over Israel in the event that Iran attacked them.

Considering it was no more than 72 hours ago that President Obama made his historic call for a “new beginning” to US relations with the Muslim world, it seems incredible that his administration is already raising the prospect of an Iraq-style invasion of Iran.

Already six years in, the Iraq occupation has killed thousands of US soldiers, sucked trillions from the American economy, and is stretching the military to its limits. It is unfathomable that with this war still far from over, the Obama Administration is considering an Iraq redux in its larger neighbor to the east.

War With Iran: Has It Already Begun?

by Justin Raimondo

www.antiwar.com

In public, when it comes to the Iranian question, President Obama is all sweet reason and kissy-face. His recent video message to the Iranian people was just what the doctor ordered. However, this public performance is severely undercut by an ongoing covert program aimed at regime-change in Tehran – or, at least, at undermining the Iranian regime to such an extent that it must respond in some way.

This covert action program, reported by Seymour Hersh last year, was started by the Bush administration and funded to the tune of $400 million. The U.S. is, in effect, conducting a secret war against Tehran, a covert campaign aimed at recruiting Iran’s ethnic and religious minorities – who make up the majority of the population in certain regions, such as in the southeast borderlands near Pakistan – into a movement to topple the government in Tehran, or, at least, to create so much instability that U.S. intervention to "keep order" in the region is justified. Given recent events in Iran – a suicide bombing in the southeast province of Sistan-Baluchistan and at least two other incidents – the effort is apparently ongoing.

A suicide-bomber blast, which occurred inside a mosque in the city of Zahedan, killed at least 30 people: a rebel Sunni group with reported links to the U.S. claimed responsibility. The Iranian government immediately accused the U.S. and Israel of being behind the attack. The violence was very shortly followed up by attacks on banks, water-treatment facilities, and other key installations in and around Zahedan, including a strike against the local campaign headquarters of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Add to this an attempted bombing of an Iranian airliner, which took off from the southwestern city of Ahvaz, and you have a small-scale insurgency arising on Iran’s eastern frontier.

The Iranians, confronted with peace overtures from Washington, can be blamed for wondering if the war against them has already begun.

Keep Reading...

punditman says...A classic example of the difference between a nation's overt, transparent foreign policy and its covert, hidden foreign policy. These can appear at odds with one another and sometimes are: one part of the US government wants to negotiate with Iran on US terms and the other wants to bomb them to smithereens while pretending to negotiate. Which side of the Iran debate will win within the Obama administration? The real hawks or the fake doves?

Or, these "two factions" can be considered part of an overall two track, carrot and stick approach—the end game to which is in flux. I think.

The Lobby Wants War

www.antiwar.com

by Justin Raimondo

The Israel lobby has been running into a few problems lately, but it’s nothing they don’t think they can handle: a charge of treason, a strong suspicion of obstructing justice, and a gathering storm of criticism from a few dissident intellectuals and policy types. Nothing to get too exercised about. Having felled Charles "Chas" Freeman, smitten Gen. Zinni, and sidelined those in the Obama administration who question the nature and utility of America’s "special relationship" with Israel, the Lobby’s flagship organization, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), is primed to hold their national conference in Washington next week, with Jane "This Conversation Doesn’t Exist" Harman slated to address the gathering.

The focus of the conference, and the legislative centerpiece of the event, will be passage of the Iran Diplomatic Enhancement Act, which would ban US companies from providing Iran with refined petroleum products, and seeks to punish European companies — particularly the Swiss, who come in for two specific mentions in the text of the bill — for doing so.

To begin with, the name affixed to this piece of legislative legerdemain is a prime example of congressional doublethink: will it really enhance diplomatic relations with Iran to impose draconian sanctions, the equivalent of an economic chokehold and a prelude to a military blockade? Hardly, and that is very far from its clear intent.

This bill is all about provoking the Iranians, effectively sabotaging efforts to engage in a mutual dialogue with Tehran. Why the egregious packaging? Well, it seems the American people are sick and tired of war, and preparations for war, and so it is far less incriminating if a member of Congress can say he (or she) voted for "the Iran Diplomatic Enhancement Act" than it is to admit they supported isolating Iran economically.

Keep Reading...

punditman says...
Oh, yeah, there's something else happening other than swine flu. The US-Iran dance continues even if no one is paying attention. As does a US foreign policy warped by undo influence.

Obama Goes Ahead With Missile Defense Shield Despite Disarmament Pledge

The United States would continue to develop a missile defence shield until Iran abandoned its nuclear ambitions, President Barack Obama said in the Czech Republic.

by Toby Harnden and Bruno Waterfield

"As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defence system that is cost-effective and proven," he told a crowd of about 20,000 gathered in Hradcany Square, next to Prague Castle.

"Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran's neighbours and our allies."

Read on...

Peacenik read this story. And re-read it. And re-read it. Peacenik can only shake Peacenik's head and wonder what in the bejezzus Obama is thinking. Obama wants to go ahead with a completely discredited, wildly expensive, missle shield that will not work. Obama talks about Iran like it is the old Soviet Union. The U.S. no longer can afford a pot to piss in yet it continues to spend like crazy on the military. Empires collapse. Empires deserve to collapse.