Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

US denies 24-hour bombing plan for Iran

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 01:44 PM
Original message
US denies 24-hour bombing plan for Iran
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 01:45 PM by nam78_two
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/us-denies-24hour-bombing-plan-for-iran/2007/02/25/1172338467912.html


US denies 24-hour bombing plan for Iran
February 26, 2007

DESPITE the Bush Administration insisting that it does not intend to go to war with Iran, a Pentagon panel has been created to plan a bombing attack that could be implemented within 24 hours of getting the go-ahead from President George Bush.

The special planning group was established in the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in recent months, according to an unidentified former US intelligence official cited in the latest issue of The New Yorker magazine by investigative reporter Seymour Hersh.

The panel initially focused on destroying Iran's nuclear facilities and on regime change but has more recently been directed to identify targets in Iran that may be involved in supplying or aiding militants in Iraq, according to an air force adviser and a Pentagon consultant, who were not identified.

The consultant and a former senior intelligence official said that US military and special-operations teams had crossed the border from Iraq into Iran in pursuit of Iranian operatives.

In response to the report, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said: "The United States is not planning to go to war with Iran. To suggest anything to the contrary is simply wrong, misleading and mischievous.

"The United States has been very clear with respect to its concerns regarding specific Iranian Government activities. The President has repeatedly stated publicly that this country is going to work with allies in the region to address those concerns through diplomatic efforts," Mr Whitman said.

Pentagon officials say they maintain contingency plans for literally dozens of potential conflicts around the world and that all plans are subject to regular and ongoing review.

The article, citing unnamed current and former US officials, also said the Bush Administration received intelligence from Israel that Iran had developed an intercontinental missile capable of delivering several small warheads that could reach Europe.

It added the validity of that intelligence was still being debated.

The article also included an interview conducted in December with Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Lebanon's Hezbollah, who said that while he had no interest in initiating another war with Israel, he was anticipating and preparing for another Israeli attack sometime this year.

Sheikh Nasrallah also said he was open to talks with Washington if such discussions "can be useful and influential in determining American policy in the region," but they would be largely a waste of time if the purpose was to impose policy.

>>

More at link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. ....:
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0rganism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. In fairness, the Pentagonians probably have plans like that for every country
It's more a question of the likelihood that such a plan would be used...

If the bushies say they don't have the plans at all, they're liars. Of course they have the plans, it's what we've been paying the DOD to do since 1945, and the people who make those plans are probably quite good at their jobs.

If they're saying they don't intend to use the plan to bomb Iran, they might be telling the truth -- and that's more likely the question their spokesmen are interested in answering. The problem is, there's only one pragmatic answer to the question. Nothing is gained by declaring hostile intent in advance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC