A senior Israeli government source told Army Radio on Tuesday that US President George W. Bush intends to launch an attack against Iran before the end of his second term.

The Israeli learned of the planned attack from a senior US counterpart who was a member of Bush’s entourage during the president’s visit to Israel last week.

The official said that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are convinced that military action against Iran is necessary immediately, but that the move is being held up by “the hesitancy of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.”

Anyone surprised?




  1. moss says:

    The final decision will be made at the Republican Convention. Voice vote.

  2. Dallas says:

    While this will rally the GOP base, it should alienate the intelligent electorate. We’ll see.

    Either way, it’s just more shit the democrats will have to clean up.

  3. Thinker says:

    I’m wondering… (not that W might not want to hit Iran) but this seems like the 3rd time I’ve seen a story in the news about ‘plans’ being leaked about us invading Iran.

    I just don’t buy it. But thats me thinking rationally, I don’t know how rational the W administration is. They have a habit of doing what they want, then justifying it.

  4. Dennis says:

    Why don’t they just replace the Sign on the Statue of Liberty that says ” We will bomb your country if they have oil and are not giving it to us”?

  5. MotaMan says:

    Not too many news sources covered the story of Iran switching to the Euro for oil trade.

    Seems most US news sources don’t seem it news worthy.

  6. lmj3325 says:

    >> # 2 Dallas said, on May 20th, 2008 at 8:34 am
    >> While this will rally the GOP base, it should
    >> alienate the intelligent electorate. We’ll
    >> see. Either way, it’s just more shit the
    >> democrats will have to clean up.

    I agree. The democrats will have to clean it up before they shit all over the place themselves.

  7. Jack Flanders says:

    It’s not about ‘getting’ their oil…it’s about driving UP oil prices. Iran is a major supplier of oil in the world. What happened when we attacked Iraq? Their oil production is crap now. After attacking Iran it will be YEARS before they get back up to full production. That will mean the oil market is MUCH tighter on supply and the price will rocket up to $200 a barrel and Exxon will double what’s already the greatest profit per quarter in the history of business on planet Earth. That’s the point. Has nothing to do with Democracy or ‘freedom'(TM).

  8. Cursor_ says:

    I hate to break it to you all.

    The oil was NOT the reason to invade Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Look at the map people. Think like Napoleon for a moment. And then remind yourselves of the 2000 election and how Al Gore and George Bush both agreed that North Korea and Iran were the major problems facing america and their race to obtain nuclear weapons.

    Now kiddies what borders Iran?

    Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Are we friends of Kuwait, India and Pakistan? Yes we are. Do these nations border or are close to Iran? Yes they are. Why did we help Kuwait in Desert Storm? Yes Iran.

    NK os bottled up with our friends South Korea, China ( yes that is why we turn a blind eye and eaf ear to human rights violations there), Russia and Japan.

    Think like Napoleon folks.

    Cursor_

  9. turbo says:

    Why not Venezuela? If we are building an empire, lets build one that is a little closer.

  10. peter_m says:

    #7, you have a point.

    #8, I don’t know what your point is. You might have one but I don’t get it…

    Peter_m

  11. keaneo says:

    #8 – aside from the fact that none of our Fearless Leaders could pretend to be as clever as Napolean, he ended up being a loser, as well.

  12. TheOnion nailed it again … this one from March 9, 2005!!

    Bush Announces Iraq Exit Strategy: ‘We’ll Go Through Iran’

    Nope. Couldn’t be surprised since I read theonion three years ago. No need to go anywhere else for news these days, unfortunately.

  13. Carcarius says:

    #10 good one 🙂

    Napolean was a great military mind for about what, 15 years tops? Considering his fate and his mistakes, comparing oneself to Napolean isn’t the same as measuring oneself up to greatness.

    Oil had something to do with it, but oil shared a spot on the bus with setting up a permanent military base in Iraq from which to attack enemy nations in the middle east. Clearly our government expected to get oil out of invading iraq so we could make the war pay for itself. That backfired and we are paying out the wazoo to maintain this war.

    Whether we attack Iran or not moot. My question is whether Bush uses his powers to remain in office longer due to wartime conditions. That is what worries me.

  14. The Pirate says:

    #12
    Of course he will. I’ve been predicting an ‘event’ for two years now that Bush will use to cancel the elections and continue his administration until the ‘threat’ is gone.

    Hope I’m wrong.

  15. Angus says:

    I supported, and still support the war in Iraq, and I think attacking Iran would be about the worst thing we could do, let alone do it unilaterally.

    I could see a backdoor attack where Israel would take matters into their own hands. It’s not like everybody doesn’t hate them anyways, and they’d do it in a surgical fashion.

  16. Noam Sane says:

    Not gonna happen. Period. How long have we been hearing this crap? Don’t be so gullible.

  17. the answer says:

    That is the greatest picture I have ever seen.

  18. Tim says:

    Some opinions:

    1. Stop wasting money on pointless wars.
    2. Stop Killing people. It does not win hearts and minds
    3. Rumours like this only push up oil prices.
    4. Start talking to the Iranians. You may just like them.
    5. It never works then you impose your values on another other societies.

    Question:
    Who benefits from these kind of rumours?

  19. joe says:

    this is the fifth time I’ve seen a “were gonna attack Iran” article. it seems every summer a new one pops up.

  20. Eric says:

    With their numbers in the toilet, and the realization that there will not be a Republican 3rd term in all likelihood, this administration is going out doing exactly what they’ve done all along, what they want, when they want, damn the long term consequences for this nation. Now it appears that if the U.S. does not invade Iran in the next few months, it will be another 4 years minimum before they get their chance to do so. Also, even though it will have been initiated by this administration, this will be yet one more war that the next administration will have to bear the brunt of. Any possible “solution” whether it be total troop withdrawal or increased troop presence coupled with a necessary draft in order keep troop levels up, will come with major flaws and difficulties, and the decision of how to extricate the U.S. from the failed policies of the current administration will damage the next administration.

    Foreign diplomacy is shot right now. It’s quite ironic that Bush’s stated goal of “spreading democracy” is being presided over by someone who came to office and remains in office under the most shady of circumstances.

    *Completely Nutty Conspiracy Theory Warning*

    By the way, wasn’t there an article here some time back stating that one of the laws that Bush got to sign said basically that if the country was under threat that National elections could be canceled? Well, what if Bush intends to launch a campaign against Iran with the hope that he can use that same law as justification to try to stay in office, or transfer control of the Oval Office to Dick Cheney if the numbers for McCain are still as bad as they are currently.

  21. Cursor_ says:

    #8
    I hope you are joking.

    #9 and #12

    I never said HE drew up the plans. Think about Desert Storm. Long before GWB and that was the first move towards it. The Second was during Clinton with China and how that admin coddled them.

    North Korea and Iran are the targets and it is the powers behind the presidents that have been moving the pieces on the board. THEY are the military strategists here.

    Napoleon was an excellent strategist until his ego took over for his skill. This is classic warfare, cut your enemy off on all sides and kill him.

    The Iranians are not stupid that is why they are fighting back THROUGH Al-Sadr. They know if they can weaken Iraq and make us withdraw it opens up a bulge in the seige.

    This is not GWB at the helm, he, Clinton and his daddy are all figureheads. Like all presidents have been since November 1963. This is the old cold war guard still making decisions.

    The old guard’s main ideal is to safegaurd the US at any cost with any means necessary. Just like they did against China, Cuba and USSR. Hem them in, control and command. Old school strategy. Nothing new.

    GW is just along for the ride and if McCain gets in he will tow the same line. Clinton would too, it is Obama that is the wild card in this matter. But he would be brought up to speed on it quick enough.

    This is not a small point to the powers that be. And it is not about oil, terrorism or maintaing the American way of life. If pushed the powers behind the throne will gladly let half the country be slaughtered to save the rest.

    The end justifies the means to these people.

    Cursor_

  22. grog says:

    um,

    am i the only to notice?

    every empire without exception in history has fallen

    such is our fate if we keep going down this road

  23. ECA says:

    I said it over 4 years ago..
    1. an elected president during war, is NEVER removed.
    His time is UP, and he’s not running.
    2. He will cause Major problems that will FORCE him to remain in office, IF’ he can.
    3. In IRAQ, they declared the OIL would PAY for the WAR…WHERES THE OIL?? We are selling it to OTHER countries to make MORE money, which ISNT coming to the USA, the money is going into OTHERS/CORPS pockets.
    4. WMD?? We raided Afghan in searching for a Murderer, and we raided IRAQ, for what reason??
    5. after the IRAQ dictator was killed, we soon discovered WHAT?? That his policies WERE RIGHT, and that MOST of his control was from FEAR. With 4 major groups vying for his country, HE was fighting back the BEST way he could. SCARE them. WMD??WHERE?? he had gotten rid of them.

  24. Rabble Rouser says:

    MARK MY WORDS…
    IF THERE IS AN ILLEGAL INVASION OF IRAN,
    THERE WILL BE AN INVASION OF THE WHITE HOUSE!

    THEY WILL NOT BE SAFE.

    THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED!

  25. doug says:

    #15. yes – the Iranians have the power to make things in Iraq go from very bad to absolutely nightmarish, and they know it.

    Ironically, by invading a country that was NOT working on WMD, the Bushies have made it that much harder to deal with a country that was (at the time) and may do so in the future.

  26. JPV says:

    Oil is just one factor. The BIG reason, the 800 pound gorilla in the room, is Israel and the influence that pro-Israeli lobbying groups, such as AIPAC and JINSA, have over US foreign policy.

    Look at who the most vocal proponents of war in the Middle East are…

    Joe Lieberman
    Irving Kristol
    William Kristol
    Norman Podhoretz
    Richard Perle
    Douglas Feith
    Lewis “Scooter” Libby
    Michael Ledeen

    Read “The Israel Lobby” by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt for further information…

    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

    According to the authors, AIPAC has become so powerful, that it is nearly impossible to get elected to any major public office in the US, without their support.

  27. JPV says:

    Eric said

    *Completely Nutty Conspiracy Theory Warning*

    By the way, wasn’t there an article here some time back stating that one of the laws that Bush got to sign said basically that if the country was under threat that National elections could be canceled?

    ———-

    You mean NSPD-51.

    Excerpt from a Slate article titled: “Who Will Rule Us After the Next 9/11? The reality of NSPD-51 is almost as bad as the paranoia.”

    http://www.slate.com/id/2176185/

    Consider that an election-eve al-Qaida attack, for instance, is not inconceivable. What if a nuclear device goes off in New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles the weekend before the election and a warning is issued that the other two cities will be hit on Election Day?

    Who will decide whether the elections in those heavily Democratic states should be put off or whether the entire election should be postponed until … when? Until the bodies are cleared, the gamma radiation has subsided? Just how wise and fair—and constitutional—are the brand-new mechanisms for “continuity of government” that NSPD-51 has put into effect with almost no prior and little subsequent discussion last May?

    And there’s another paranoia-inducing element of the story: The existence of “classified continuity annexes” whose content has been kept secret even from the House Committee on Homeland Security. A troubling aspect of the story that, so far as I know, only one mainstream media reporter, Jeff Kosseff of the Portland Oregonian, has pursued.

  28. mark says:

    #7 – That pretty much sums it up. This is no more than a fake news story meant to start speculation that the U.S. will invade Iran. This gives the oil speculators and oil companies another reason to drive up the price. Look for W and his “base” to pull a lot of interesting stunts over the next few months as they try to gut the country on their way out the door.

  29. JPV says:

    Some useless piece of shit said

    I supported, and still support the war in Iraq

    ———-

    Oh really… please tell us why? I can’t wait to hear your incoherent and senseless gibberish on the subject.

  30. Tech_1 says:

    JVP is on the ball.
    .


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 5420 access attempts in the last 7 days.