Petraeus Points to War With Iran

We wouldn't be getting our troops killed/maimed/psychologically
scarred in Iraq if we hadn't gone in there for Israel to begin with
(scroll down to the 'A Clean Break' post at http://NEOCONZIONISTTHREAT.BLOGSPOT.COM).
Check out the following as well.. Keep in mind that courageous
American Jew (Jack Bernstein) warned US that Zionist Jews would trick
US into fighting wars in the Middle East for Israel with many
Americans to die/get horribly maimed in the process like we have
already experienced in Iraq with Iran on deck:

Robert Stiver wrote:

Here's the latest commentary by an informed, deeply concerned
citizen:
http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=12673 ("Petraeus Points to War
With Iran," by Patrick Buchanan, April 11th, 2008)
(I disagree with one element of Buchanan's analysis: "The general's
testimony is forcing Bush's hand...." Petraeus is, IMHO, an ambitious,
willing military-side stooge for the Cheney-led zionazineocons [note
particularly the odious Lieberman in the article] and the dry-
drunkenly adolescent, bellicose, irrational Bush. A lethal
combination, and Gates and Mullen -- with Fallon gone and no longer
providing adult supervision -- today added additional voice to the
warmongering set....)
The Evil USrael Empire is on the march to war...Bob

April 11, 2008
Petraeus Points to War With Iran
by Patrick J. Buchanan
The neocons may yet get their war on Iran.
Ever since President Nouri al-Maliki ordered the attacks in Basra on
the Mahdi Army, Gen. David Petraeus has been laying the predicate for
U.S. air strikes on Iran and a wider war in the Middle East.
Iran, Petraeus told the Senate Armed Services Committee, has "fueled
the recent violence in a particularly damaging way through its lethal
support of the special groups."
These "special groups" are "funded, trained, armed and directed by
Iran's Quds Force with help from Lebanese Hezbollah. It was these
groups that launched Iranian rockets and mortar rounds at Iraq's seat
of government (the Green Zone) ... causing loss of innocent life and
fear in the capital."
Is the Iranian government aware of this - and behind it?
"President Ahmadinejad and other Iranian leaders" promised to end
their "support for the special groups," said the general, but the
"nefarious activities of the Quds force have continued."
Are Iranians then murdering Americans, asked Joe Lieberman:
"Is it fair to say that the Iranian-backed special groups in Iraq are
responsible for the murder of hundreds of American soldiers and
thousands of Iraqi soldiers and civilians?"
"It certainly is. ... That is correct," said Petraeus.
The following day, Petraeus told the House Armed Services Committee,
"Unchecked, the 'special groups' pose the greatest long-term threat to
the viability of a democratic Iraq."
Translation: The United States is now fighting the proxies of Iran for
the future of Iraq.
The general's testimony is forcing Bush's hand, for consider the
question it logically raises: If the Quds Force and Hezbollah, both
designated as terrorist organizations, are arming, training and
directing "special groups" to "murder" Americans, and rocket and
mortar the Green Zone to kill our diplomats, and they now represent
the No. 1 threat to a free Iraq, why has Bush failed to neutralize
these base camps of terror and aggression?
Hence, be not surprised if President Bush appears before the TV
cameras, one day soon, to decla
"My commanding general in Iraq, David Petraeus, has told me that Iran,
with the knowledge of President Ahmadinejad, has become a privileged
sanctuary for two terrorist organizations - Hezbollah and the Quds
Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard - to train, arm and direct
terrorist attacks on U.S. and coalition forces, despite repeated
promises to halt this murderous practice.
"I have therefore directed U.S. air and naval forces to begin air
strikes on these base camps of terror. Our attacks will continue until
the Iranian attacks cease."
Because of the failures of a Democratic Congress elected to end the
war, Bush can now make a compelling case that he would be acting fully
within his authority as commander-in-chief.
In early 2007, Nancy Pelosi pulled down a resolution that would have
denied Bush the authority to attack Iran without congressional
approval. In September, both Houses passed the Kyl-Lieberman
resolution designating the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist
organization.
Courtesy of Congress, Bush thus has a blank check for war on Iran. And
the signs are growing that he intends to fill it in and cash it.
Israel has been hurling invective at Iran and conducting security
drills to prepare its population for rocket barrages worse than those
Hezbollah delivered in the Lebanon War.
Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, the Central Command head who opposed war
with Iran, has been removed. Hamas and Hezbollah have been stocking up
on Qassam and Katyusha rockets.
Vice President Cheney has lately toured Arab capitals.
And President Ahmadinejad just made international headlines by
declaring that Tehran will begin installing 6,000 advanced centrifuges
to accelerate Iran's enrichment of uranium.
This is Bush's last chance to strike and, when Iran responds, to
effect its nuclear castration. Are Bush and Cheney likely to pass up
this last chance to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities and effect the
election of John McCain? For any attack on Iran's "terrorist bases"
would rally the GOP and drive a wedge between Obama and Hillary.
Indeed, Sen. Clinton, who voted to declare Iran's Revolutionary Guard
a terrorist organization, could hardly denounce Bush for ordering air
strikes on the Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force, when Petraeus
testified, in her presence, that it is behind the serial murder of
U.S. soldiers.
The Iranians may sense what is afoot. For Tehran helped broker the
truce in the Maliki-Sadr clash in Basra, and has called for a halt to
the mortar and rocket attacks on the Green Zone.
With a friendly regime in Baghdad that rolled out the red carpet for
Ahmadinejad, Iran has nothing to gain by war. Already, it is the big
winner from the U.S. wars that took down Tehran's Taliban enemies,
decimated its al-Qaeda enemies and destroyed its Sunni enemies, Saddam
and his Baath Party.
No, it is not Iran that wants a war with the United States. It is the
United States that has reasons to want a short, sharp war with Iran.
April 13, 2008 1:35 AM
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Iran War, Real Fear Petraeus Beating War Drums for Attack
Why aren't we talking about this (be sure to scroll down to the
comments section at the following URL):

http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot....bout-this.html

http://TinyUrl.com/3vue6c

--------------------------------------------------------

My concern is that Hillary Clinton (and other AIPAC hacks in the
Senate) have basically given Bush the authority to bomb the IRGC after
they approved labeling the IRGC as a 'terrorist group' via passing the
Kyl-Lieberman Iran amendment (Seymour Hersh mentions why Hillary did
such via the last part of the following URL from Amy Goodman's
'Democracy Now' broadcast):

http://www.democracynow.org/2007/10/...nsifying_plans

Be sure to read the UPI article about the 'JINSA crowd' which leads
off the following URL:
U.S. Middle East policy motivated by pro-Israel lobby:

http://tinyurl.com/5z9ja3

AIPAC is Pushing US to War with Iran for Israel (see the Scott
Ritter youtubes in the comments section for how he mentioned AIPAC and
that nukes might be used on Iran as well):

http://neoconzionistthreat.blogspot....with-iran.html

The Power of the Israel Lobby in the United States

http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle17525.htm

http://www.vpro.nl/programma/plaatsd...edia/33964115/

A War for Israel? Colin Powell seems to think so:

http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/zone0...ic.php?t=61128

Here is the tiny URL for the above referenced 'Democracy Now'
broadcast:
Seymour Hersh: White House Intensifying Plans to Attack Iran

http://tinyurl.com/6lsrew

How do you explain the many times over the last few years you
proclaimed the war was imminent and NOTHING HAPPENED?

On Apr 13, 2:18 pm, Matt wrote:
How do you explain the many times over the last few years you
proclaimed the war was imminent and NOTHING HAPPENED?

If he waits long enough,there's always a *slim* chance it *might*
happen. Then he will scream he knew it all along.
I'd still like him better if he'd just shut up.

On Apr 14, 6:15�am, eyeball wrote:
On Apr 13, 2:18 pm, Matt wrote:

How do you explain the many times over the last few years you
proclaimed the war was imminent and NOTHING HAPPENED?

If he waits long enough,there's always a *slim* chance it *might*
happen. Then he will scream he knew it all along.
I'd still like him better if he'd just shut up.

I wonder what his stance will be "if" Hillary or Obama gets elected in
November? Ahmadinejad has been pretty quiet this year compared to
2006-2007 as well.

But if McCain gets in, expect the rhetoric to start up again... and
even crazier postings!

Rob

Well, ya gotta do something with all those retiring F-117s. We don't
need to occupy Iran, just blow the **** out of it. Between the B-1s,
B-2s, 117s and the U.S. Navy, it would be trivially easy to destroy
their Navy, Air Force, nuke plant, mechanized army, oil reserves...

I don't think there's any reason to go to war with the infantry as long
as their mobility is eliminated since they can't seem to silence their
Whackjob in Chief.

-c