« Bush, McCain and their Attempt to Divide American Jews | Main | Kentucky and Oregon Democratic Primary Results »

Bush/GOP Planning Attack on Iran

The Jerusalem Post is on top of the story:

The White House on Tuesday flatly denied an Army Radio report that claimed US President George W. Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term. It said that while the military option had not been taken off the table, the administration preferred to resolve concerns about Iran's push for a nuclear weapon "through peaceful diplomatic means."

Army Radio had quoted a top official in Jerusalem claiming that a senior member in the entourage of President Bush, who visited Israel last week, had said in a closed meeting here that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were of the opinion that military action against Iran was called for.

The official reportedly went on to say that, for the time being, "the hesitancy of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" was preventing the administration from deciding to launch such an attack on the Islamic Republic.

The Army Radio report, which was quoted by The Jerusalem Post and resonated widely, stated that according to assessments in Israel, the recent turmoil in Lebanon, where Hizbullah has established de facto control of the country, was advancing an American attack.

This may be news to some, but Wizbang Blue has been writing on this for a year now, and saying exactly that - that Bush would attempt action against Iran before the US election in November. Here's some links to those posts:

  • May 25, 2007 - Paul Hamilton in "Cheney Believes He "Must Tie Bush's Hands" on Iran":

    "Steve Clemons says there's a power struggle going on within the Bush administration over policy toward Iran. Money quote:

    Cheney himself is frustrated with President Bush and believes, much like Richard Perle, that Bush is making a disastrous mistake by aligning himself with the policy course that Condoleezza Rice, Bob Gates, Michael Hayden and McConnell have sculpted."

  • July 17, 2007 - Paul Hamilton in "Cheney Again Pushes for Attack on Iran":

    "The balance in the internal White House debate over Iran has shifted back in favour of military action before President George Bush leaves office in 18 months, the Guardian has learned."

    The shift follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although the Bush administration is in deep trouble over Iraq, it remains focused on Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: "Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo."

  • August 7, 2007 - Larkin in "The Torrent of Lies Continues":

    "As with Iraq before the invasion, what we are seeing now with Iran is part of a calculated campaign of disinformation and outright lies meant to drum up popular support for going to war with that country."

  • August 27, 2007 - Lee Ward in "Fox Attacks: On Iran"

    "Robert Greenwald and Brave New Films released this video yesterday documenting the concerted efforts by conservative propagandists Fox News to drag the US into war with Iran."

  • September 2, 2007 - Steve Crickmore in "Pentagon Shock 'Three-day Blitz' Plan for Iran":

    "The only certainty is that when and if the 3 day Pentagon blitz plan is put into practice; chaos, death and destruction will reign in Iran, and America and Israel will face a full and incalculable Muslim backlash (particularly Shiite) in Iraq, in the Middle East and elsewhere."

  • October 22, 2007 - Lee Ward in "Iran has been a U.S. Target for Years"

    "Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann worked at the highest levels of the Bush administration as Middle East policy experts for the National Security Council. Mann conducted secret negotiations with Iran. Leverett traveled with Colin Powell and advised Condoleezza Rice. They each played crucial roles in formulating policy for the region leading up to the war in Iraq. But when they left the White House, they left with a growing sense of alarm -- not only was the Bush administration headed straight for war with Iran, it had been set on this course for years. That was what people didn't realize. It was just like Iraq, when the White House was so eager for war it couldn't wait for the UN inspectors to leave. The steps have been many and steady and all in the same direction. And now things are getting much worse. We are getting closer and closer to the tripline, they say."

  • October 31, 2007 - Lee Ward in "More Evidence of U.S. Intent to Bomb Iran in 2008":

    "The lame-duck Bush administration has their pre-election strategy all drawn up and now appears to be moving ahead with plans to attack Iran just prior to the 2008 election."

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 2.1/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 2.1/5 (7 votes cast)

Comments (4)


What brand of tinfoil do you prefer for your hats ?

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

And you know it's a lie because --- Bush told you it was?

And you believe him?

Why would this administration admit -- "Oh yeah, we're planning to to attack Iran in the next couple of months?"

So of course they'll say no - and of course the Republicans apologists will believe them.

There have been a steady stream of indications - I'll be ecstatic if I don't have the opportunity to say "I told you so..." but I won't be surprised at all if I do have that opportunity. Not surprised at all.

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

"All you have is a stale conspiracy theory which has been repeated over and over again, yet never quite happened in the real world."

I understand that cave dwellers like yourself don't use calendars, but the prediction that Bush will invade Iran before election day isn't incorrect until -- bear with me know and feel free to use a calculator or count on your toes -- the day after election day, you putz.

"It's pathetic, really, that you cannot even come up with new delusions."

Yeah, whatever... You've added noting to the discussion, as usual, DJ. But thanks for stopping by.

Is it supposed to be a unilateral unprovoked invasion, or one that's actually caused by Iran's actions? There's a slight difference between the two.

Or is there perhaps nothing Iran could do that would justify an invasion? Would something like seriously threatening Europe or other ME countries be justification?

Launch an UNARMED Shahab-6 at a major city (say, Istanbul) wait for the splash to die down, then go "Next one has a nuclear warhead - you unbelievers withdraw from Iraq NOW and stop supporting Israel NOW or you will see the city destroyed." - would that justify an incursion/invasion to stop them?

Or are you running on strict rules here that say nothing could possibly justify such an action?

Having plans to invade Iran doesn't mean much. There's probably been plans to invade Iran since the '50s - the military is GREAT for planning for contingencies, and I have no doubt that those plans are continually updated. But having plans doesn't mean you'll use them. You may have insurance on your house or car, but you won't be tapping it if it isn't needed.

When it IS needed, you won't be able to get it. It's the same thing with military planning - when you need the plan, you'd better have something ready because you won't have the time to make it. But just because you make the plan doesn't mean you're going to need it or use it.

I think I've referenced this before, but you might want to get a copy of Pagonis's book "Moving Mountains" about GW1 - there was actually a framework plan for what to do if Iraq invaded Kuwait. And it had been ready for a couple of decades, if I recall correctly. Pull out the plan, revise as needed - and they started moving mountains.

But you need a plan. They couldn't have done it without a plan.


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.