Pentagon ‘three-day blitz’ plan for Iran

international | anti-war / imperialism | other press

Tuesday September 04, 2007 15:09

by pat c

Interesting story which suggests the Pentagon has plans to launch a blizzard of "surgical strikes" Iran. With 1,200 targets I wonder how much collateral damage will be caused? Somehow I see creches being hit more easily than command-centres. Full story at link.

The Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.

Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: “Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.” It was, he added, a “very legitimate strategic calculus”.

save preference

Comments (5 of 5)

Is the friend of my enemy still my friend?

by PaddyK

Wed Sep 05, 2007 17:06

1200 targetted sites ? Try 10, 000 !

Read this link for a very interesting analysis of where the world is in relation to a war on Iran :

Their analysis is detailed, elementary in their opinion, and very frightening. They conclude the Pentagon has plans for a "massive, multi-front, full-spectrum" shock and awe-type attack on Iran short of a ground invasion.

-- 10,000 sites are targeted using bombers and long range missiles;

-- the US has enough ground, air and Marine forces in the region to devastate Iran on short notice;

-- covert US (and possibly UK) and armed popular resistance activities are already ongoing in the Iranian provinces of Azeri, Balujistan, Kurdistan and the country's major oil producing region of Khuzestan in the southwest bordering Iraq and the Persian Gulf.
____________________

My question to PatC is, in your opininion, will it still be a credible position to support factions that are funded backed and directed by covert American forces as part of their overall plan to bring down Iran. Just because they call themsleves "resistance". ?

And if so then surely it's acceptable to support Fateh in palestine as it carries out the work of America and Israel at the expense of historical Palestinian aims for their Nation.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=2...13701

Test Marketing

Wed Sep 05, 2007 16:19

An interesting story from the New Yorker which suggests the war party is in the ascendency in the White House. Full text at link.

If there were a threat level on the possibility of war with Iran, it might have just gone up to orange. Barnett Rubin, Afghanistan expert at New York University, has written an account of a conversation with a friend who has connections to someone at a neoconservative institution in Washington. Rubin can’t confirm his friend’s story; neither can I.

They [the source’s institution] have “instructions” (yes, that was the word used) from the Office of the Vice-President to roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day; it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects. It will be heavy sustained assault on the airwaves, designed to knock public sentiment into a position from which a war can be maintained. Evidently they don’t think they’ll ever get majority support for this—they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is “plenty.”

True? I don’t know. Plausible? Absolutely. It follows the pattern of the P.R. campaign that started around this time in 2002 and led to the Iraq war.

Postscript: Barnett Rubin just called me. His source spoke with a neocon think-tanker who corroborated the story of the propaganda campaign and had this to say about it: “I am a Republican. I am a conservative. But I’m not a raging lunatic. This is lunatic.”

And pigs will fly

by Watcher

Wed Sep 05, 2007 08:57

future reader - none posts,

"This attack will happen; Iran's religious jailors will fold like a house of cards. Re-revolution will free the captives of the foolish religious controllers. Freedom will rise. Freedom was worth the cost to you is it not worth it now?"

Yeh, just like freedom was brought to Iraq. Rock on Moses.

Not true

by Aragon

Wed Sep 05, 2007 08:46

The attack will happen, millions of people will be slaughtered, the current religious leaders will be replaced by even more authoritarian and despotic rulers to keep the population bitter and divided so that Iranian territory and oil can be secured (stolen) for the US. Look at Iraq: oppression of women, homosexuals and progressives is worse than ever. Civil war is raging. Same in Afghanistan. Trade Unionism will be even more ruthlessly put down. Anyone who argues for real democratic freedom will be assassinated/disappeared/silenced. Iranian society and infrastructure will be destroyed. The US has spent the last 50 years violently interfering with other governments around the world and replacing them with facist thugs who are prepared to do its bidding, so that they can preserve their economic advantage. When the Bush administration talks about 'freedom' it is referring to the 'freedom' of the US to murder and slaughter anyone anywhere who might have anything that it wants to take or control.

other view

by future reader - none

Wed Sep 05, 2007 03:38

This attack will happen; Iran's religious jailors will fold like a house of cards. Re-revolution will free the captives of the foolish religious controllers. Freedom will rise. Freedom was worth the cost to you is it not worth it now?

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Lockdown Skeptics

Voltaire Network

Pentagon ‘three-day blitz’ plan for Iran

Comments (5 of 5)