US Releases Iran Attack Plan

Saw this as breaking news on BBC news at 10 last night.

news.bbc.co.uk...

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the trigger for such an attack reportedly includes any confirmation that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon - which it denies.

Alternatively, our correspondent adds, a high-casualty attack on US forces in neighbouring Iraq could also trigger a bombing campaign if it were traced directly back to Tehran.

We all saw it coming of course. Be prepared in the coming weeks to see a major attack in Iraq attributed to Iran (obviously with no evidence presented to the public) and an attack to go ahead. We've already had a lot of minor attacked where Iran is mentioned as the culprit but there's a biggy on the way.

So going by that......some American ATSer`s have been speculating recently about a fabricated attack on American soil as an excuse to go to war with Iran,where by that quote, could be a fabricated attack on American personal in Iraq as the excuse needed.

Wonder what they would consider to be a"high casualty attack on US forces" to have the excuse, 5 10 20 50 100 casualties?

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says the trigger for such an attack reportedly includes any confirmation that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon - which it denies.

So even if the US finds out that Iran "was"developing the weapon thats as good as "are or going to again"? thats sounds strange.

I think the way this is going there's no set number of casualties that would spring an attack. I think if the government could attribute even a small number of US troop's deaths to Iran they would feel they'd have the backing of the nation to go ahead. Just create a bit of extra patriotic feelings 'God Bless Our Troops', all that kinda stuff. I think half the US citizens are looking for any excuse to have it out with another country. They could either fabricate and attack or just sit and wait for the next attack and blame it on the Iranians, which is the most likely choice. Certainly the easiest. As usual we would get no evidence whatsover as to who is responsible and just be expected to take their word for it.

Nothing like being an optimist concerning unfolding events. You seem convinced of an impending U.S. invasion of Iran, when in fact such an outcome is very unlikely. Before any formal state to state hostilities ever ensued you should expect to see stories of bombings, etc. inside Iran and increased news accounts of average Iranian's discontent with their govt. Things on this scale don't just spring forth in full bloom.

A relatively large killing of coallition troops that could be pinned on Iran would most likely go to the U.N. and all U.S. allies as the govt. would certainly want as much of the rest of the world behind it as it could manage. Further, given the suspicion such evidence would engender, you can bet it would be near airtight before it was ever presented for review.

[edit on 20-2-2007 by Astronomer70]

I am not convinced of a US 'invasion' of Iran but I certainly do see this as a precursor to an attack by the US on Iranian soil. I feel this is a likely outcome with the recent bombing in Iraq attributed to Iran with no solid evidence and the clever wording of this release leaving the terms very open.

The weird thing is that this was breaking news on BBC last night and has appeared on their website this morning, but I've found no mention of this on any US news sites.

Why would the US release an attack plan in the UK media before informing their own citizens????

Much talk recently of US attacking Iran, looking into the political alliance of Iran/ China/ Russia and the likes of Syria etc. The US will not just start a war as the outcome would be unknown as to what Irans 'business partners' would do.

On the positive side the US (if you believe this) have already turned back jets from Israel heading to Iran which again makes me think the US are not so gung ho on this subject as we are led to believe.

My belief is Iran would like to mix it up with the US as they have went out of there way to antagonise the US recently. They will not back down on nuclear issues, they have dumped the dollar and unless you are rather naive Iran is assisting the Iraqi militants. The president has made several war like statements which leads me to think now is the time for Iran to attempt a first strike, reasoning is if they dont use what they have first they will lose it.

If the Iranian believe that they are going to be hit soon (i am not a military strategist by the way) they would hit out first either in Iraq and/ or by attempting to take out as many allied ships as possible. After all the guys in charge are radical not mainstream and we have seen what they can do.

Israel will not stand by as I would imagine them being attacked in the early hours of any conflict (re Iraq & Saddam)

With middle east oil not flowing profits for russian and other nations gas/ oil will sky rocket. Energy poor countries will start to feel the pinch (ever so slightly) and may get involved, widening the war (China not worth thinking about) It is a nightmare scenario and as for buying fuel for the car well get in line now with a few jerry cans.

Certainly food for thought. Iran are defiantely creating strong ties with their allies at the moment. Wouldn't we all in the same situation? Handers as we say.

I've quite enjoyed the goading Iran has given the US lately as it's made them realise that full-on tactics may be a bad idea and the Iranians may be better prepared than they think. Anything that puts them on their back foot and makes them realise they can't just bully whole countries about is a good thing and a reality check will ultimately save the lives of US troops and definately Iranian civilians.

I don't think Iran is stupid enough to hit out first and I think that's what the goading is all about. Come and have a go if you think your hard enough and all that.

I believe the Iranians are assisting the Iraqi militants as much as the coallition troops are. Hell, we're training and arming the Iraqi army at the moment and by the looks of it there's a lot of them involved in the sectarianism sweeping the country. Then there was the incident of the British troops 'rescued' by knocking down a prison. Apparently they were dressed as Iraqi's and carrying weapons cause they were 'undercover'. yeah right. Why could we not work it out with the authorities then, get them legally released and not 'accidentaly' break down the wall of a jail and release genuine prisoners? www.guardian.co.uk.... then there was the terrorists 'dressed like Iraqi police' who bombed a mosque last year. Anyone not think maybe it was Iraqi police?

I'm gonna buy a bike I think. Or even better, a horse. And a big warm sleeping bag. This war over resources aint gonna get any better and we're the ones that'll end up paying through the nose while others profit. The world's going to hell in a hand-basket and we've all got front row tickets.

In response to the sentiments of some of you Brits (respectfully):

Im not so sure that half our population is looking to have it out with another country. I live in North Carolina, where there is a strong right wing religious type minority with a lot of vocal cords behind them, i.e., they know nothing about political structure, foreign policy, the whole bit. Obviously being from here Ive ran into my fair share of the ones that say "lets turn those ragheads in their desert to sand!" I usually disregard such comments. Anyway, my point being, I think Iraq was quite possibly a worse decision than vietnam, and attacking Iran now would be equivalent to us dropping bombs on china during the vietnam war, its just poor thinking, and a sure fire way to # us and the coming generations in the ass. I have faith (hopefully not unfounded) in our nation's citizens to not make ignorant statements and support ultra-ripe bull#, and I would hope FAR less than 1/2 would be behind such action, but then again I did see that show "are you smarter than a 5th grader?" on fox tonight, looking on with dismay.