If there's one thing Chicken-Hawks know about, it's about how to put other people's kids into Harm's Way ... whether or not there is evidence to justify the Military action or not.
Long as there's something in it for them -- their own political ambitions, or those ambitions of their industrial backers.
Tough talk on Iran from GOP candidates
by Micah Zenko and Emma Welch, latimes.com -- Jan 10, 2012
Mitt Romney sets the tone, arguing that the Obama administration has been weak in managing an increasingly intransigent and confrontational Iranian regime. "If we reelect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon," Romney stated unequivocally. "And if you elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon."
Rick Santorum has repeatedly called for a preemptive bombing strike on Iranian nuclear facilities as part of his "plan." He has implied that he would expand the use of covert operations, possibly including targeted killings, against Iranian nuclear scientists: "I will say to any foreign scientist that's going into Iran to help on their [nuclear] program: You will be treated like an enemy combatant, like an Al Qaeda member."
Newt Gingrich explicitly advocates regime change by whatever means necessary. In the short term, he has called for increased sanctions and covert operations to "break the Iranian regime" within a year by "cutting off the gasoline supply to Iran and then, frankly, sabotaging the only refinery they have."
Well the GOP Chicken-Hawks may already be getting their wish, about that "covert war" option, with our latest enemy de jour, ramping up on the drumbeat circuit ...
This was a one-day story here in the states. Over in Iran, it was a bit more than that -- it was a bit more than "just another bomb going off in the Middle East." In Iran, it was clear evidence of a pattern forming.
Iran Signals Revenge Over Killing of Scientist
by Rick Gladstone -- nytimes.com -- Jan 12, 2012
Iran expressed deepening fury at Israel and the United States on Thursday over the drive-by bombing that killed a nuclear scientist in Tehran the day before, and signaled that its Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps might carry out revenge assassinations.
The scientist, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, 32, was deputy director of the Natanz uranium enrichment plant. He was killed on his way to work in rush-hour traffic in Tehran on Wednesday morning. Iranian news accounts said that a motorcyclist slapped a magnetized bomb on his car, killing Mr. Roshan and mortally wounding his driver and bodyguard, identified as Reza Qashaqei.
Mr. Roshan was at least the fifth Iranian scientist with nuclear connections to be killed since 2007.
When one country does it -- it's called "terrorism."
When other countries do it -- it's called "self defense."
Are the assassinations of Iranian scientists an act of terrorism?
by Dan Murphy, Staff writer, csmonitor.com -- Jan 12, 2012
Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, a chemist who the Iranian state press says was the marketing director for Iran's Natanz nuclear facility, was the latest victim. He was killed by a small bomb affixed to the underside of his car, the same method used to murder nuclear physicist Massoud Ali Mohammadi in Tehran exactly a year ago. In all, four scientists connected to nuclear work in Iran have been killed since the start of 2010.
Whoever is responsible, the murders appear to be as much about spreading terror as they are about stopping the nuclear program. Iran has legions of capable engineers, and none of the victims appear to have had indispensable knowledge or abilities. According to the Congressional Research Service, Iran's main nuclear research complex in Isfahan probably has 3,000 employees alone, and the there are about 10 other major nuclear sites in the country.
But spreading fear among the living can slow them down, spread confusion, or deter young recruits. If scientists became frightened enough, they might be reluctant to travel to work or conferences inside the country. Meanwhile, enhanced security measures at the sites could prove cumbersome.
Was it real? or is it Memorex? Was it "terrorism?" or "self defense?"
... because as we've been told, We MUST Defend ourselves against Terror, before it strikes, home again. Be afraid. Be very afraid. Our global freedom depends on it.
Now that's the kind of weasel-language a Chicken-Hawk could really learn to launch a career from, eh?...
So what's the basis for all this "sky-is-falling" rhetoric, which has painted Iran as our next national security interest? Could it possibly be, these vaguely-dire warnings from the U.S. NIE?
National Intelligence Estimate: Iran - Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities
cfr.org -- Published November 2007
This National Intelligence Estimate report on Iran's nuclear capabilities states "We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough HEU for a weapon is late 2009, but that this is very unlikely. We judge with moderate confidence Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough HEU for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame. (INR judges Iran is unlikely to achieve this capability before 2013 because of foreseeable technical and programmatic problems.) All agencies recognize the possibility that this capability may not be attained until after 2015."
[Note: HEU = Highly enriched uranium]
You know, that's the same U.S. NIE that already has such an incredible Track Record, on prognosticating just who the "bad guys" are ... and where they are ... and who they will strike next.
Don't you remember -- these guys:
Declassified Report: No Al Qaeda Link In Pre-War Iraq
from Kathy Gill, About.com Guide -- Sep 8, 2006
The document is a scathing indictment of the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), the document which presents a unified (some say political) front, reconciling or brushing over difference of opinion among various intelligence agencies. The NIE was used to justify attacking Iraq in March 2003.
Both post-war and pre-war intelligence show "no credible information that Iraq was complicit in or had foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks or any other al Qaeda strikes." [...]
Other conclusions from the report:
* "Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate judgment that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. [...]
* "Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate judgment that Iraq's acquisition of high strength aluminum tubes was intended for an Iraqi nuclear program. [...]
* "Postwar findings do not support the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate judgment that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure uranium ore and yellowcake' from Africa. [...]
* "No postwar information indicates that Iraq intended to use al Qaeda or any other terrorist group to strike the United States homeland before or during Operation Iraqi Freedom." [...]
When will America pause and reflect on what is it really, that sends us to war, time and time again?
Probably when Chicken-Hawks actually learn to fly ... or actually learn to Check the Facts. ie. NOT soon enough!
The National Intelligence Estimate DOES actually have quite the Track Record, afterall ... whether Chicken-Hawks care to review it or not. Too bad this weren't some kind of 'sporting event', where the stats actually mattered, eh ...
SO what do you think, Will Iran become the next Iraq (War)?
Well a lot depend on whether the American People (led by the Media), decides to tune out on this one too?
... I hear the next season of 'Survivor' is gonna be pretty good -- they're adopting an 'American Idol' dial-in format, for the Immunity competition -- sort of as a cross-format experiment. Now that's must-see TVeee!
Be sure to to tune in now, ya hear! Their ratings depend on it.