NationStates Jolt Archive

White House Taunting Iran Into Giving Them an Excuse to Attack (http://www.breitbart.com/news/na/070211191036.3j1c6g1n.html)

Feb 11 2:10 PM US/Eastern
White House officials are taunting Iran into an action the United States could use as an excuse for an attack, a former security official told Newsweek, the magazine reported.

"They intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something (the United States) would be forced to retaliate for," Hillary Mann, former director for Iran and Persian Gulf Affairs at the National Security Council, which reports to the White House, told the New York newsweekly.

US relations with Iran have chilled since President George W. Bush placed Iran on an "Axis of Evil," alongside North Korea and Iraq under Saddam Hussein, in a January 2002 speech.

Earlier on Sunday, Bush administration officials in Baghdad claimed that Iranian-built bombs smuggled into Iraq had killed at least 170 US and allied soldiers since June 2004.

US officials also claim Iran is enriching uranium to make nuclear bombs, while the Islamic Republic claims the nuclear fuel will make electricity.

The New York Times reported Friday that administration officials were concerned about especially lethal roadside bombs built in Iran, which borders Iraq.

The New York daily said its sources insisted they were not laying the basis for an attack on Iran.

Sources: OccN©2003-2007(OcceanNEWS) / Newsweek / New York Times.
my2cents: Golf of Tonkin#2 coming?
my3cents: breitbart.com?? never heard of them.. OccN does not endorse this source.

That's actually a really good idea. If Iran strikes first, it will be the aggressor, and I seriously doubt that any other nation in the Middle East (the Sunnis would love them to just go away) or anywhere else in the world is going to side with them, especially if they show themselves to be a belligerent power.

That's actually a really good idea. If Iran strikes first, it will be the aggressor, and I seriously doubt that any other nation in the Middle East (the Sunnis would love them to just go away) or anywhere else in the world is going to side with them, especially if they show themselves to be a belligerent power.

Except that the military is overextended as it is thanks to the boondoggle in Iraq. Giving Crazy Mahmoud a reason to strike is a bad idea when you have a few family jewels exposed out in the open.

Except that the military is overextended as it is thanks to the boondoggle in Iraq. Giving Crazy Mahmoud a reason to strike is a bad idea when you have a few family jewels exposed out in the open.

Yeah, but he's even worse off than we are...a lot worse. If he goes to war, Iran will likely collapse either due to its economy failing or just plain revolution. Even so, the clerics will oust him before we come to war...they're terrified of us and they're terrified of a war.

Yeah, but he's even worse off than we are...a lot worse. If he goes to war, Iran will likely collapse either due to its economy failing or just plain revolution. Even so, the clerics will oust him before we come to war...they're terrified of us and they're terrified of a war.

That's assuming he'll try to use the formal Iranian military. I figure he'll just pump more resources into the Shiite parts of the insurgecy and keep his open hand clean. There's plenty of propaganda and psychological damage mounting up as is par for the course with any successful insurgency, and Ahmedinejad or one of his advisors likely knows that making a bold attack on the United States will simply snap the American public out of its frustration with Iraqnam and give a blank check to Il Douche, which is not a good thing for them.

Even so, the clerics will oust him before we come to war...they're terrified of us and they're terrified of a war.interesant.

If the Clerics are so terrified of US.. If the clerics are so willing to bend-over'n'swallow.. Why dont we put the Clerics in power??

hello? hellooo? CIA cyber-surveillance unit (http://cia.com).. I am talking to you.. YES YOU!!
copy pasty this.. and send it to the White-House/Pentagon.. ASAP

If Iran was actually dumb enough to be the aggressor then it would be an opportunity for us. It is not as if we would have any trouble beating them after all but I have to worry about Bush screwing up a good thing. Even if a good chunk of Iran's population would like serious reforms, if Bush tries to be unreasonable with the new government being formed or keeps troops around too long then we would looking at a disaster far greater then what we are facing now in Iraq.

These people in the White House never learn, do they?

If the Clerics are so terrified of US.. If the clerics are so willing to bend-over'n'swallow.. Why dont we put the Clerics in power??

Because if they did that, they wouldn't be in power any more. They have to keep their people under control as well, and that means standing up just enough for propaganda purposes.

If the Clerics are so terrified of US.. Why dont we put the Clerics in power??Because if they did that, they wouldn't be in power any more. err.. I.. hmm..

so.. what are you smoking?
and can I have some? :D

I just think the leader of every nuclear capable nation (even if its just for power generation not weapons) should be made to go visit the Museum in Hiroshima.

so.. what are you smoking?

Crude oil.

and can I have some? :D

No. ;p

Crude oil.

I pity your lungs.

I pity your lungs.

At least it's not as bad as the crude oil baths they have in Azerbaijan...

Ahmedinejad or one of his advisors likely knows that making a bold attack on the United States will simply snap the American public out of its frustration with Iraqnam and give a blank check to Il Douche, which is not a good thing for them.
You truly are the master of the portmanteau!

On topic: War is bad. There is no good reason to have a war with Iran, whose ascendency to power in the region is a natural consequence of the Iraq war.

I believe that a fight between US and Iran would be political suicide for both governments. (and in Iran, heads might literally roll)

Except that the military is overextended as it is thanks to the boondoggle in Iraq. Giving Crazy Mahmoud a reason to strike is a bad idea when you have a few family jewels exposed out in the open.

I think if Iran out right attacks US soldiers, then there will be no problem with military personnel, as I am sure there would be a draft, or a lot of people volunteering to fight against Iran.

as I am sure there would be a draft, or a lot of people volunteering to fight against Iran.

Do you live in the same US as I do?

Do you live in the same US as I do?

Think about it though. The reason we didn't have a draft for iraq, was because it didn't out right attack us, right? After 9-11, when we were attacked by an organization, wasn't there and increase in people joining the military? So, if Iran out right attacked us, I am sure the many people would join the military to fight, or if not that, the US gov't would have actual means to enforce a draft.

Think about it though. The reason we didn't have a draft for iraq, was because it didn't out right attack us, right? After 9-11, when we were attacked by an organization, wasn't there and increase in people joining the military? So, if Iran out right attacked us, I am sure the many people would join the military to fight, or if not that, the US gov't would have actual means to enforce a draft.

There wouldn't be near enough volunteers to sustain a war with Iran, unless Iran did something like murder a bus full of school children in Kansas City or something that might actually effect the lives of the apathetic.

Most people are just fed up with everything this administration is doing.

That's actually a really good idea. If Iran strikes first, it will be the aggressor, and I seriously doubt that any other nation in the Middle East (the Sunnis would love them to just go away) or anywhere else in the world is going to side with them, especially if they show themselves to be a belligerent power.

Why is everyone but me comfortable with being part of a conquering, aggressive, warmongering nation?

Why is everyone but me comfortable with being part of a conquering, aggressive, warmongering nation?

We like to pretend we're Spartans until reality smacks the shit out of us.

Why is everyone but me comfortable with being part of a conquering, aggressive, warmongering nation?

Well, not exactly conquering. We pretty much have to go back to Afghanistan. Then we'll have to go back to Iraq. Then back to Afghanistan. But hey... I'm sure we'll have plenty of dough and troops to take out Iran a couple of times, too.

Well, not exactly conquering. We pretty much have to go back to Afghanistan. Then we'll have to go back to Iraq. Then back to Afghanistan. But hey... I'm sure we'll have plenty of dough and troops to take out Iran a couple of times, too.

We conquered. We overthrew a regime by force and our armies are occupying the nation. Just because it isn't going well politically in the eyes of the US public doesn't really change this.

We conquered. We overthrew a regime by force and our armies are occupying the nation. Just because it isn't going well politically in the eyes of the US public doesn't really change this.

I'll let time speak for me and let it be an apology to you if somehow you turn out to be right.

We conquered. We overthrew a regime by force and our armies are occupying the nation.mission accomplished?

Am I the only person to notice the irony in the US blaming Iran for 170 deaths, in light of the Pandora's Box of horrors the USA itself opened in Iraq?

Speculation on a blog.

That's actually a descent from your usual quoting of Yahoo News stories.

Why is everyone but me comfortable with being part of a conquering, aggressive, warmongering nation?

Because they're not all fuckwits like you.