Iran News
UFPJ Talking Points
Escalating Threats of U.S. Attacks Against Iran
By Phyllis Bennis
PDF version
The
Big Lie: Iran Is a Threat
By Scott Ritter
10/08/07 "Common Dreams" -- -- Iran has never manifested itself as a serious
threat to the national security of the United States, or by extension as
a security threat to global security. At the height of Iran’s “exportation
of the Islamic Revolution” phase, in the mid-1980’s, the Islamic Republic
demonstrated a less-than-impressive ability to project its power beyond
the immediate borders of Iran, and even then this projection was limited
to war-torn Lebanon.
The
fallout from an attack on Iran would be devastating
The drumbeat of war in Washington is growing - and so must public pressure
against British involvement in such folly
Seumas Milne
Friday October 5, 2007
The Guardian
It seems almost incredible after the catastrophe of the Iraq war, but the
signs are growing that the Bush administration wants to do it all over again
- this time to Iran. Just as in the runup to the invasion of Iraq, the Washington
air is thick with unsubstantiated claims about weapons of mass destruction;
demonisation of the country's president has reached bizarre proportions;
intelligence leaks about links with al-Qaida and attacks on US and British
targets are now routine; demands for war from the administration's neoconservative
outriders are becoming increasingly strident; the pronouncements of George
Bush and his vice-president, Dick Cheney, are turning ever more belligerent
- and administration sources claim that the British government is privately
ready to play ball.
The
Redirection
By Seymour M. Hersh
Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on
terrorism?
02/25/07 "New Yorker" -- - Issue of 2007-03-05
A STRATEGIC SHIFT
In the past few months, as the situation in Iraq has deteriorated, the Bush
Administration, in both its public diplomacy and its covert operations,
has significantly shifted its Middle East strategy. The “redirection,” as
some inside the White House have called the new strategy, has brought the
United States closer to an open confrontation with Iran and, in parts of
the region, propelled it into a widening sectarian conflict between Shiite
and Sunni Muslims.
US
generals will quit if Bush orders Iran attack
From The Sunday Times
February 25, 2007
Michael Smith and Sarah Baxter, Washington
SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign
if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly
placed defence and intelligence sources.
An
American Strike on Iran is Essential for Our Existence"
AIPAC Demands "Action" on Iran
By GARY LEUPP
February 24 / 25, 2007
Former CIA counterterrorism specialist Philip Giraldi, comparing the propaganda
campaign against Iran to that which preceded the war on Iraq, has recently
declared, "It is absolutely parallel. They're using the same dance steps-demonize
the bad guys, the pretext of diplomacy, keep out of negotiations, use proxies.
It is Iraq redux." He's only one of many in his field (including Vincent
Cannistraro, Ray McGovern, and Larry C. Johnson) doing their best to expose
the Bush-Cheney neocon disinformation campaign according to which Iran is
planning to produce nukes in order to commit genocide, while abetting terrorists
in Iraq who are killing American troops.
UFPJ
Talking Points:
Escalating Threats of U.S. Attacks Against Iran
By Phyllis Bennis
Institute for Policy Studies
14 February 2007
US
'Iran attack plans' revealed
BBC News
US contingency plans for air strikes on Iran extend beyond nuclear sites
and include most of the country's military infrastructure, the BBC has learned.
It is understood that any such attack - if ordered - would target Iranian
air bases, naval bases, missile facilities and command-and-control centres.
Iran
- Ready to attack
Dan Plesch, New Statesman, Published 19 February 2007
American military operations for a major conventional war with Iran could
be implemented any day. They extend far beyond targeting suspect WMD facilities
and will enable President Bush to destroy Iran's military, political and
economic infrastructure overnight using conventional weapons.
British military sources told the New Statesman, on condition of anonymity,
that "the US military switched its whole focus to Iran" as soon as Saddam
Hussein was kicked out of Baghdad. It continued this strategy, even though
it had American infantry bogged down in fighting the insurgency in Iraq.
Targeting
Tehran
by MICHAEL T. KLARE
The Nation
[March 5, 2007 issue]
At this critical moment when most Americans seek to extricate US forces
from the fighting in Iraq as swiftly as possible, George W. Bush appears
determined to construct a new rationale for intervention whose logical conclusion
is not withdrawal but a wider war, possibly involving attacks on Iran later
this year. Like an inveterate gambler who has lost every previous round
and now faces insolvency, Bush seems poised to wager everything on one last
throw of the dice. Before more lives are put at risk in this reckless bid,
the flimsy props of Bush's new rationale must be exposed to rigorous scrutiny
and strict limits placed on his warmaking capacity.
Bush
Sets Stage for a New Confrontation
Targeting Tehran
By PATRICK COCKBURN
The United States is moving closer to war with Iran by accusing the "highest
levels" of the Iranian government of supplying sophisticated roadside bombs
that have killed 170 US troops and wounded 620.
Center
for Constitutional Rights Issue Open Letter Warning Of Illegality Of Any
Offensive Military Action By U.S. Against Iran
Synopsis
On February 1, 2007, European, international, and United States legal and
human rights groups issued an open letter warning of the illegality of any
offensive military action by the United States against Iran.
Signatories include the American Association of Jurists, the Center for
Constitutional Rights (U.S.), Droite Solidarite (France), European Association
of Lawyers for Human Rights and Democracy, Italian Association of Democratic
Lawyers, Haldane Society (United Kingdom), International Association of
Democratic Lawyers, Indian Association of Lawyers (India), Japanese Association
of Lawyers for International Solidarity (Japan), Lawyers Against War (Canada),
National Lawyers Guild (U.S.), and the Progress Lawyers Network (Belgium).
How
the World Can Stop Bush
By Paul Craig Roberts
What would be the consequences of a US or Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear
energy sites?
At the 2006 Perdana Global Peace Forum, Australian medical scientist Dr.
Helen Caldicott provided an authoritative analysis of the devastating impact
on human life that would result from the radiation release from such an
attack.
US Briefing
on Iran Discredits the Official Line
By Gareth Porter
IPS News
Tuesday 13 February 2007
Washington - The first major effort by the George W. Bush administration
to substantiate its case that the Iranian government has been providing
weapons to Iraqi Shiites who oppose the occupation undermines the administration's
political line by showing that it has been unable to find any real evidence
of an Iranian government role.
An
Appeal to Conscience to Those Who Would Bomb Iran
By US Army Reserves Colonel (Retired) Ann Wright
Tuesday 13 February 2007
George Bush is going to war again. We see it in the Bush administration's
rhetoric about Iran's nuclear program. We see it in the Bush administration's
commentary on Iran's reported role in training and equipping Iraqis who
are fighting US forces that have invaded and occupied that country. We see
it in the Bush administration's criticism of Iran's role in funding and
equipping Hezbollah in Lebanon. We see it in the Bush administration's direction
to the US military to detain Iranian diplomats in Iraq, breach diplomatic
facilities, and capture or kill Iranian operatives in Iraq. We see it in
the deployment of the third US Naval carrier group (twenty more ships) to
the Gulf.
Target
Iran: US able to strike in the spring Despite denials, Pentagon plans for
possible attack on nuclear sites are well advanced
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
The Guardian
Saturday February 10, 2007
US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage,
in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush administration, according
to informed sources in Washington.
Attacking
Iran would be disastrous, warns coalition of opinion led by retired officers
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
Monday February 5, 2007
The Guardian
Warnings of the dire consequences of military confrontation with Iran, and
calls for a renewed diplomatic effort, are being issued on both sides of
the Atlantic in a sign of the growing anxiety over the prospect of US or
Israeli action. A coalition of foreign policy thinktanks, humanitarian organisations
and peace groups will issue a report today arguing that an attack on Iran,
reportedly being contemplated by the US and Israel as a means of slowing
down Iran's nuclear programme, would backfire disastrously.
Iran:
A War Is Coming
by John Pilger
February 3, 2007
Anti-war.com
The United States is planning what will be a catastrophic attack on Iran.
For the Bush cabal, the attack will be a way of "buying time" for its disaster
in Iraq. In announcing what he called a "surge" of American troops in Iraq,
George W. Bush identified Iran as his real target. "We will interrupt the
flow of support [to the insurgency in Iraq] from Iran and Syria," he said.
"And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry
and training to our enemies in Iraq."
Ex-national
security adviser warns that Bush is seeking a pretext to attack Iran
A political bombshell from Zbigniew Brzezinski
By Barry Grey in Washington DC
2 February 2007
Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Thursday, Zbigniew
Brzezinski, the national security adviser in the Carter administration,
delivered a scathing critique of the war in Iraq and warned that the Bush
administration’s policy was leading inevitably to a war with Iran, with
incalculable consequences for US imperialism in the Middle East and internationally.
America
'poised to strike at Iran's nuclear sites' from bases in Bulgaria and Romania
Monday, 29 January 2007
By Gabriel Ronay
Report suggest that 'US defensive ring' may be new front in war on terror.
On
Iran, Bush Faces Haunting Echoes of Iraq
By DAVID E. SANGER
January 28, 2007
International Herald Tribune
WASHINGTON, Jan. 27 — As President Bush and his aides calibrate how directly
to confront Iran, they are discovering that both their words and their strategy
are haunted by the echoes of four years ago — when their warnings of terrorist
activity and nuclear ambitions were clearly a prelude to war.
This time, they insist, it is different.
Stop
the Iran War Before It Starts
Friday, 26 January 2007
By Scott Ritter
Democrats should seek immediate legislative injunctions to nullify the War
Powers' authority granted to the President in September 2001 and October
2002 when it comes to Iran.
01/27/07 "The Nation" -- - In April 2001 I was invited to Washington, DC,
by a group of Republican Congressmen collectively known as the Theme Team.
The subject was Iraq. It seems that the Theme Team, responsible for monitoring
the ideological pulse of America, was somewhat perturbed that a self-described
Republican and former Marine officer, not to mention a former UN weapons
inspector, was trash-talking America's Iraq policy. While this sort of action
might have been acceptable during the tenure of a Democratic President like
Bill Clinton, it was not part of the grand design when it came to the presidency
of George W. Bush.
IAEA
chief says attack on Iran would be catastrophe
By Stella Dawson
Jan 25, 2007
An attack on Iran would be catastrophic and encourage it to develop a nuclear
bomb, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, said on Thursday.
The
Coming War Against Iran
Thursday, 25 January 2007
By Daan de Wit
Given the presence of four American submarines off the coast of Iran, Eduard
Baltin, former commander of the Russian fleet, reasons that the U.S. is
planning to attack Iran.
U.S. ships headed to Mideast called a warning to Iran
LA Times - From the Associated Press
January 24, 2007
DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES — A second U.S. aircraft carrier group steaming
toward the Middle East is Washington's way of warning Iran to back down
in its attempts to dominate the region, a top U.S. diplomat said Tuesday.
The
Steady March to War on Iran:
What It Would Take to Stop It
By VIRGINIA TILLEY
Counterpunch - January 18, 2007
Johannesburg, South Africa
From its inception, the US occupation was a lose-lose proposition. Simply
rolling into Iraq -- a society of which the Bush neocons had so distorted
a conception and US occupation commanders and foot soldiers had no grasp
at all - was a formula for doom. But US policy in the Middle East has now
advanced to a new stage and the risk to the rest of us has changed. For
stopping an attack on Iran, which is the only way to avert final regional
disaster, may require action in Washington that falls outside the parameters
of what is normally politically possible.
» Iran:
Thinking the Unthinkable
by Conn Hallinan
Foreign Policy in Focus
January 17, 2007
Is Israel, supported by the Bush administration, preparing to launch an
atomic war against Iran?
» AVOIDING
GEOPOLITICAL DISASTER IN 2007/8:
IRAN, KOREA AND THE END OF THE BUSH DOCTRINE
Simon Dalby,
Professor of Geography and Political Economy
Carleton University, Ottawa
» Iran:
Pieces in Place for Escalation
"The fuel for a fire is in place".
by Colonel Sam Gardiner
Global Research
January 16, 2007
The following text by Colonel Sam Gardiner (USAF, Retired) confirms our
worst fears. The US is in an advanced state of readiness to wage war on
Iran.
» Briefing Paper,
Oxford Research Group
Iran:
Consequences of War
» Next
target Tehran, by Dan Plesch, the Guardian Jan 15th
- All the signs are that Bush is planning for a neocon-inspired military
assault on Iran
» Bush's
Iraq Plan: Goading Iran Into War By Trita Parsi, IPS News. Posted January
13, 2007.
There was little new about the U.S. strategy in Iraq, but on Iran, the president
spelled out a plan that appears to be aimed at goading Iran into war with
the United States.
Canadian
Peace Alliance Convention 2006
Resolution on Iran
Whereas, the Bush Administration has categorized Iran as part of a so-called
"axis of evil" as early as 2002; and
Whereas, leading figures in the Bush Administration have expressed a desire
to overthrow the Iranian government: and
Whereas, numerous and credible press reports have exposed the advanced planning
of some kind of US-led attack on Iran in the coming months; and
Whereas, the US has attempted to isolate Iran for developing nuclear energy,
accusing Iran of secretly developing nuclear weapons; and
Whereas, the US has been unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to substantiate
its claims against Iran; and
Whereas, Iran is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and is
not in violation of it or any other international laws on weapons proliferation;
Therefore:
Be it resolved that the Canadian Peace Alliance:
· oppose any attack - military or otherwise - on Iran;
· oppose sanctions against Iran whether initiated by the United States or
the United Nations;
· prepare its member organizations to mobilize immediately against any attack
on Iran should it become clear that one is coming; and
· use the occasion of other mobilizations to draw attention to the Iran issue;
Be it further resolved that the Canadian Peace Alliance strongly urge that
the Government of Canada refuse to participate in and/or support any U.S.
military actions against Iran.
Adopted - November 2006
CANADIAN PEACE ALLIANCE STATEMENT ON THE IRAN CRISIS.
February 27, 2006
The United States and Israel have both recently stated that they may engage in a military campaign against Iran for alleged development of nuclear weapons. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is being used for energy production and not for weapons development. In either case, any use of military force against nuclear installations in Iran will be illegal under international law and must be opposed.
Protocol 1 of the Geneva Convention states that no country can attack a nuclear facility or any other target if, "if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population." An attack on a nuclear facility will cause massive damage to the local environment and to the civilian population in the vicinity. A nuclear attack would cause untold civilian deaths.
There is no way to distance the current confrontation with Iran from the US invasion and occupation of Iraq. The US, without the support of the international community and in clear violation of international law, invaded and occupied a sovereign Arab state ostensibly based on the same motivation about the threat of weapons of mass destruction. The fact that no weapons have been found in Iraq and the proof that the evidence of such a program in Iraq was deliberately falsified renders the US accusations against Iran questionable, to say the least.
Furthermore, while the Canadian Peace Alliance (CPA) is opposed to the development of any nuclear weapons, the state of Iran should not be singled out for its potential program, particularly under the current circumstances with both the US and Israel threatening nuclear attack. It is the position of the CPA that nuclear proliferation will continue as long as those states which currently have nuclear weapons refuse to comply with their international treaty obligation to disarm their own arsenals.
The CPA therefore calls on the Government of Canada to oppose any military action against Iran and to resolve this issue diplomatically.
|
Canadian Peace Alliance
|
phone: 416-588-5555
|
Sign up for CPA Action Alerts!