Op/Ed: A Staged War And Precursor To Pre-emptive Strike On Iran

In the aftermath of the Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon a clearer picture is starting to form as to why Israel's actions were so disproportionate. We heard of prior planning and accusations of "wider goals". But what would be gained and what was in the balance?


Just weeks after the Israeli Defence Force unleashed hell on the entire Lebanese population, ostensibly in response to the two kidnapped Israeli soldiers, we learnt that the War had been planned for atleast a year before hand. The plan had been shared with think tanks, diplomats as well as American and British political leaders. Israel was simply waiting for a pretext to carry out it's battle plan against Hezbollah. This is why it was seen as disproportionate to Hezbollah's kidnappings.

San Francisco Chronicle
(07-21) 04:00 PDT Jerusalem -- Israel's military response by air, land and sea to what it considered a provocation last week by Hezbollah militants is unfolding according to a plan finalized more than a year ago.

In the six years since Israel ended its military occupation of southern Lebanon, it watched warily as Hezbollah built up its military presence in the region. When Hezbollah militants kidnapped two Israeli soldiers last week, the Israeli military was ready to react almost instantly.

President Putin remarked on July 15th, just 3 days after the kidnappings:

Boston Globe

"However, it is our impression that aside from seeking to return the abducted soldiers, Israel is pursuing wider goals," he said at a midnight news conference after a dinner opening the summit of the Group of Eight industrialized nations. He did not elaborate.

The well known investigative reporter, Seymour Hersh, has written an article for the New Yorker magazine citing anonymous US government officials who claim the War against Hezbollah is a precursor to a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear sites.

AFP

Citing a US government consultant with close ties to Israel, Hersh also reports that earlier this summer, before the Hezbollah kidnappings, several Israeli officials visited Washington "to get a green light" for a bombing operation following a Hezbollah provocation, and "to find out how much the United States would bear".

"The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits," the magazine quotes the consultant as saying. "Why oppose it? We'll be able to hunt down and bomb missiles, tunnels, and bunkers from the air. It would be a demo for Iran."

The claims have been officially denied by the White House as "patently untrue". Yet Hersh goes further in his article and claims Israel had an ulterior motive for engaging in it's pre-planned fullscale attack on Lebanon.

AFP

But Pulitzer Prize-winning US journalist Seymour Hersh writes that President George W Bush and vice president Dick Cheney were convinced that a successful Israeli bombing campaign against Hezbollah could ease Israel's security concerns and also serve as a prelude to a potential US pre-emptive attack to destroy Iran's nuclear installations.

It makes sense, if the United States perhaps in conjunction with Israel pre-emptively struck at Iran's nuclear sites, the Iranians would most definately ask Hezbollah to retaliate against Israel with it's rocket arsenal. This war against Lebanon has in effect neutralized Hezbollah and has denied Iran a proxy-retaliatory strike against Israel over any pre-emptive strike on her nuclear sites.

London Independant

The expert added: "If there was to be a military option against Iran's nuclear facilities, it had to get rid of the weapons that Hizbollah could use in a potential retaliation at Israel. Bush was going after Iran, as part of the 'axis of evil', and its nuclear sites, and he was interested in going after Hizbollah as part of his interest in democratisation."

So, as President Putin alluded to, Israel was pursuing a wider goal than what it stated. It was paving the way for a possible pre-emptive strike on Iranian nuclear sites by the United States and possibly Israel. Knowing this we can be prepared to spot any other provocations which might help facilitate this pre-ordained illegal strike on Iranian sovereignty.

[edit on 14/8/06 by subz]

Yet another reminder that this is chess, not checkers.

Scary stuff. Can't we all just get along?

A Staged War And Precursor To Pre-emptive Strike On Iran????

You have got to be kidding :shk:

Show me the plans, Show me the plans. All the rest is nothing but biased personal opinions

Originally posted by shots
Show me the plans, Show me the plans. All the rest is nothing but biased personal opinions

"Op/Ed"

Originally posted by shots
Show me the plans, Show me the plans. All the rest is nothing but biased personal opinions

Aside from the fact that, yes, this is an Opinion/Editorial piece. There is ample quoted testimony from US governmental officials who say this is tied to a "possible" pre-emptive strike on Iran.

Should we never speak of this topic until we have a photocopy of the US battle plan Fed-Ex'd to us? Surely you jest Shots. Conversely, show me the plans for an Iranian nuclear weapons program

Originally posted by subz
............
It was paving the way for a possible pre-emptive strike on Iranian nuclear sites by the United States and possibly Israel. Knowing this we can be prepared to spot any other provocations which might help facilitate this pre-ordained illegal strike on Iranian sovereignty.

[edit on 14/8/06 by subz]

Pre-empty illegal strike?...

First of all it hasn't happened....

Second, i guess the staments made by the president of Iran to purge Israel from the middle east, and destroy the nation, etc, etc, etc, is not a reason for going after nuclear sites in Iran.....

Of course this op/ed is nothing but "biased opinion against the U.S. and Israel".....

Oh, and third, if people are going to take president Putin's statements as "nothing but the truth", I can point out a few things that would have made the ousting of the Iraqi regime a "priority for the U.S."..... and not "an illegal war" as some keep repeating.....

My guess is that this is in response to the United States placing sanctions on two Russian companies which were still selling missile technology to Iran, and were supported by the Russian government, and because of these sanctions the Russian government got really mad at the U.S.

Notice the two faced tactics that the Russians have been using against the west.... and some still call them our friends...

Originally posted by subz

Should we never speak of this topic until we have a photocopy of the US battle plan Fed-Ex'd to us? Surely you jest Shots. Conversely, show me the plans for an Iranian nuclear weapons program

HAHA, quality stuff

posted by Muaddib
Notice the two faced tactics that the Russians have been using against the west.... and some still call them our friends...

Thats pot calling the kettle black. I could cite numerous "two-faced" things the US does to it's allies, including it's bestest friend in the whole World, the United Kingdom of Tony Blair (If Bushes speaches are anything to go by, you'd think he thought Blair was King....)

Through this conflict we have found 2 things..

1. What type of weapons Hezbollah actually has
2. That Iran is supplying weapons and intelligence.

This will be used at a later date as reasons. HEzbollah has also laost a large part of its southern force and ability to strike with the use of as many missles as they have used. This will make reataliation not as agreesive when the attacks on Iran start. It makes sense, the Jewish state made hezbollah show it's hand.

Originally posted by Muaddib
Pre-empty illegal strike?...

First of all it hasn't happened....

But the precedent has already been set by a pre-emptive illegal war which btw has turned out to be one of the worst blunders in American history.

Second, i guess the staments made by the president of Iran to purge Israel from the middle east, and destroy the nation, etc, etc, etc, is not a reason for going after nuclear sites in Iran.....

Leaders sometimes say stupid things. George Bush has claimed that his presidency was ordained by God and that God sent him on a mission to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Does that mean another country should pre-emptively strike/invade America?

Of course this op/ed is nothing but "biased opinion against the U.S. and Israel".....

First of all, opinions are always biased. Second of all, using the same tactic people could easily dismiss your ideas as being neoconservative anti-communist paranoia akin to Mcarthyism. Debate the argument, not the person giving it.

Oh, and third, if people are going to take president Putin's statements as "nothing but the truth", I can point out a few things that would have made the ousting of the Iraqi regime a "priority for the U.S."..... and not "an illegal war" as some keep repeating.....

And if we're going to take president Bush's statements as nothing but the truth then he should be impeached and charged with treason:

9/11/01: Where Was George?

On December 4, 2001, Bush was asked, "How did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?" Bush replied, "I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower--the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident. But I was whisked off there. I didn't have much time to think about it." Bush repeated the same story on January 5, 2002, stating, "First of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error, and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake...."

Video of Bush admitting he watched the first plane hit the WTC.

subz

Good thread . . . is not doubt about the reals goal of the US since the invasion of Iraq, After US getting Israel ready with weapons I guess they had to use them one way or another.

It seems that other nations in the world knows the US Israel agenda but many Americans are still in denial from the invasion in Iraq and they will be in denial after US attacks Iran.

The goal of the fighting against hezbollah in Lebanon was to get Iran and Syria involve.

But The two countries in questions know exactly what the intentions are so things didn't go as planned.

But now that Israel seems to have weakened Hezbollah in the Lebanon side the next window of opportunity to attack Iran will be after the death line of the 22.

We will have to wait and see, after all US doesn't need permission from the UN to launch an offensive against Iran.

[edit on 14-8-2006 by marg6043]

Here's some more on this subject.

The New Yorker

I wonder how will this whole crisis end. Doesn't feel good.


[edit on 14-8-2006 by Duby78]

Originally posted by ShakyaHeir

But the precedent has already been set by a pre-emptive illegal war which btw has turned out to be one of the worst blunders in American history.

Wrong....president Putin was one of the people to actually give a reason why the war was not illegal, even if he claimed it was a crime... The Russian government provided evidence to the U.S. government since 9/11 and up to the beginning of the war that the Iraqi regime was planning terrorist attacks in U.S. soil. Which is why I asked subz if he was now believing Putin.....

You can recite the war was illegal all you want, but that doesn't make it so...

Originally posted by ShakyaHeir
Leaders sometimes say stupid things. George Bush has claimed that his presidency was ordained by God and that God sent him on a mission to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Does that mean another country should pre-emptively strike/invade America?

That's a "claim" made by a senior Palestinian politician... and one thing is to say a stupid thing once, but to continue to say Israel will be purged from the middle east, and it will be destroyed, etc, etc, is no "a stupid comment"...it shows that the Iranian president wants to destroy all of Israel and it's people...

Originally posted by ShakyaHeir
First of all, opinions are always biased. Second of all, using the same tactic people could easily dismiss your ideas as being neoconservative anti-communist paranoia akin to Mcarthyism. Debate the argument, not the person giving it.

He is jumping to conclusions and obviously he doesn't mind if Israel or the United States are continuosly threatened by the Iranian regime. Such threats from a regime that is seeking nuclear technology, and has been secretly going after wmd for at least a couple decades, including nuclear weapons, are not to be taken lightly..

I know that there are people who don't care if "Israel gets attacked", and some people apparently think Israel should just take the attacks and threats and should sit quietly, waiting for more attacks... but most of the Israeli people would not want to take that chance, I am sure.

Originally posted by ShakyaHeir
And if we're going to take president Bush's statements as nothing but the truth then he should be impeached and charged with treason:

.................... Everybody reacts differently to such a situation.... When i was awaken by my girlfriend that day, I though i was watching a movie. Thinking that the pilot must be bad or made a bad mistake is not grounds for "an impeachement"......

[edit on 14-8-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
Wrong....president Putin was one of the people to actually give a reason why the war was not illegal, even if he claimed it was a crime... The Russian government provided evidence to the U.S. government since 9/11 and up to the beginning of the war that the Iraqi regime was planning terrorist attacks in U.S. soil. Which is why I asked subz if he was now believing Putin.....

You can recite the war was illegal all you want, but that doesn't make it so...

Can we please stay on topic? I dont care about President Putin, that is not the topic of this thread.

Originally posted by Muaddib
He is jumping to conclusions and obviously he doesn't mind if Israel or the United States are continuosly threatened by the Iranian regime. Such threats from a regime that is seeking nuclear technology, and has been secretly going after wmd for at least a couple decades, including nuclear weapons, are not to be taken lightly..

The threats are reciprocal, do you forget the "Axis of Evil" speech? Do you forget the threats to attack Iranian nuclear sites at Isfahan by Israel? Do you forget the threat of economic sanctions? Do you forget the threats of military retaliation over unfounded accusations of a non-existant nuclear weapons program?

Originally posted by Muaddib
I know that there are people who don't care if "Israel gets attacked", and some people apparently think Israel should just take the attacks and threats and should sit quietly, waiting for more attacks... but most of the Israeli people would not want to take that chance, I am sure.

I dont much care for countries who jump at their own shadow and who play the beligerent card and fob it off as pre-emptive self defence. What constitutes agression nowadays? Is Iran being agressive? I see only a few countries who are systematically attacking and invading other nations and it's not Iran.

Remember the UN charter? It specifically forbids violence unless it is self defence and the UNSC is involved. An Iranian nuclear weapons program has not even been proven yet, let one proven that Iran has intentions of attacking any one. There is no evidence for any of this, let alone enough evidence to justify something as specific as self defence.

Originally posted by Muaddib
.................... Everybody reacts differently to such a situation.... When i was awaken by my girlfriend that day, I though i was watching a movie. Thinking that the pilot must be bad or made a bad mistake is not grounds for "an impeachement"......

Topic?

Duby78

Excellent article, we can tell that the minds at work in the control of the middle east has been planning for a while.

Everything is a cause and effect and Iran will be next.

But instead of telling the American public the truth behind the possible attacks against that country I hate the dirty propaganda and brainwashing tactics.

Originally posted by Muaddib
You can recite the war was illegal all you want, but that doesn't make it so...

Actually with that one statement you are quite wrong. If the majority of people in America end up believing that this is wrong and illegal, then it is if put into action. That's an if, but a possible if.

Bias against Israel and US? Give me a break.

Originally posted by subz

Can we please stay on topic? I dont care about President Putin, that is not the topic of this thread.

Part of your argument is because of what president Putin said, so do you choose when to believe president Putin?

Originally posted by subz
The threats are reciprocal, do you forget the "Axis of Evil" speech? Do you forget the threats to attack Iranian nuclear sites at Isfahan by Israel? Do you forget the threat of economic sanctions?

They threatened to attack Iranian military sites, because of the Iranian president statements, the statements made by the Iranian mullahs and other Iranian politicians, as well as the fact that Iran helps hezbollah which makes terrorist attacks and military attacks on Israel...

Originally posted by subz
Do you forget the threats of military retaliation over unfounded accusations of a non-existant nuclear weapons program?

Non-existant?... where have you been hiding?.... It is known that Iran has been working in a nuclear weapons program, after denying it for almost 2 decades, when they had agreed not to do this.... and now they finally declare they want to pursue nuclear technology once again, with their main university teaching all aspects of nuclear technology, which includes nuclear weapons.

Originally posted by subz
I dont much care for countries who jump at their own shadow and who play the beligerent card and fob it off as pre-emptive self defence. What constitutes agression nowadays? Is Iran being agressive? I see only a few countries who are systematically attacking and invading other nations and it's not Iran.

No...iran is threatening to destroy and purge Israel from the middle east.... Now you are going off topic by mentioning the other wars aren't you?....

Originally posted by subz
Remember the UN charter? It specifically forbids violence unless it is self defence and the UNSC is involved. An Iranian nuclear weapons program has not even been proven yet, let one proven that Iran has intentions of attacking any one. There is no evidence for any of this, let alone enough evidence to justify something as specific as self defence.

Statements from the iranian president to purge Israel off the Middle East, statement from senior Iranian mullahs saying "it is alright for Iran to have nuclear weapons and use them if the world has them"..., statements by every politician in the Iranian regime who say Israel must be destroyed....all those and the fact that Iran is not only pursuing nuclear technology, which i don't know why anybody says they are "pursuing it now" when they have been going after nuclear weapons for at least almost 2 decades, all of the above together and the fact that Iran is helping Hezbollah to make terrorist attacks and military attacks on Israel, are grounds for Israel defending itself...

---edited to correct statement----

[edit on 14-8-2006 by Muaddib]

*Sigh*


I can't be bothered......

[edit on 14/8/06 by stumason]

Originally posted by stumason
*Sigh*


I can't be bothered......

Me either, let the dog have his bone

[edit on 14/8/06 by subz]

Originally posted by subz

Originally posted by stumason
*Sigh*


I can't be bothered......

Me either, let the dog have his bone

[edit on 14/8/06 by subz]

I am not a dog, nor a baby...just because I don't bow and nod to every claim you and others like you make so that "you can like me, or be my friend" is not my style.

If you can't disprove those statements i made, it should speak volumes, and you trying to belittle me, as some others around here keep trying to do, doesn't make you right, and does not prove your claims in the least...

[edit on 14-8-2006 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
If you can't deny those statements i made, it should speak volumes, and you trying to belittle me, as some others around here keep trying to do, doesn't make you right, and does not prove your claims in the least...

[edit on 14-8-2006 by Muaddib]

Not at all. But with past expierience of you and your close minded, McCarthyistic paranoia tells me it's best just to let you believe what you will, as no amount of effort is going to make you change your mind.

Others, debating with has a point, as I've managed to turn a few that were like you. But the Dark side has consumed you too much I am afraid and any effort expended will be in vain.