For two years now, military plans and movements have been made to support a plan to attack Iran. Unknown to many people, and not generally understood among politicians and journalists, is that there is a trigger for this war, and that trigger is a 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. Rarely discussed is the Cheney-Rumsfeld plan, leaked by the military planners in 2005, to blame Iran for a 9/11-type attack, regardless of who carries out the attack, and to "respond" by bombing Iran with nuclear weapons.
Most of you have heard the stated reasons for preparing to attack Iran:
- nuclear weapons research
- support for terrorism
- arming the Iraqi insurgency.
And many of you know that these stated reasons are either fabrications or deliberate mischaracterizations of events, similar to the propaganda campaign that preceded the invasion of Iraq.
But what you may NOT KNOW, is that there is ANOTHER, rarely discussed motivation for attacking Iran that originates with Vice President DICK CHENEY.
I'll give exposition to the original 2005 STRATCOM plan to attack Iran. Then I'll give you Cheney's motivation for the plan.
In Part II, I'll give you a timeline, with little narrative, exposing the propaganda for what it is, and showing that the Administration is lying when they claim they are not preparing to attack, and that they are seeking a diplomatic resolution to a "crisis" that doesn't really exist. I'll debunk all three of the floated pretexts for war.
In Part III, I'll show that, just like they did in Iraq, the Bush Administration is already carrying on an undeclared war in Iran, and is using unreliable Iranian dissidents to fabricate pretexts for war.
Finally, in Part IV, I will expose the best example that a false flag trigger is being contemplated, by showing you an attempt to trigger the Iran War plan that FAILED. Though the Administration has PUBLICLY emphasized that the trigger has changed to an attack on our troops in Iraq, there is no reason to believe that Dick Cheney has abandoned his original plan to trigger the Iran attack "in response" to a 9/11-type attack on the United States.
The Iran War Plan.
The link is the first article that appeared on this plan, leaked by the military planners at STRATCOM.
In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.
The Deep Background article is unattributed, but there isn't any doubt the source is Phil Giraldi.
Of course, there have been articles showing that the plan to attack Iran has been around since before 2005, and the plausibility of Giraldi's report doesn't rest on his sources alone. There is, for example, this report by Seymour Hersh in January 2005
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush administration has been carrying out secret reconnaissance missions to learn about nuclear, chemical and missile sites in Iran in preparation for possible airstrikes there, journalist Seymour Hersh said Sunday.
But there is another reason to believe Giraldi's report. You see, the United States has had a nuclear doctrine for decades that prohibits the "pre-emptive" use of nuclear weapons. Or rather, the United States HAD such a nuclear doctrine, til May of 2005, according to this article by William Arkin of the Washington Post:
The inclusion, therefore, of a nuclear weapons option in CONPLAN 8022 -- a specially configured earth-penetrating bomb to destroy deeply buried facilities, if any exist -- is particularly disconcerting. The global strike plan holds the nuclear option in reserve if intelligence suggests an "imminent" launch of an enemy nuclear strike on the United States or if there is a need to destroy hard-to-reach targets.
Read the whole Arkin article. You have to do that in order to get the full sense of what this change to our nuclear doctrine means in the context of the other articles about attacking Iran. The fact that this change was made and then applied to the later STRATCOM plan is a significant connection of dots, and it bolster's Giraldi's claims.
Just one week later, this article appeared in the Wahington Post, by Bradley Graham:
War Plans Drafted To Counter Terror Attacks in U.S.
COLORADO SPRINGS -- The U.S. military has devised its first-ever war plans for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States, envisioning 15 potential crisis scenarios and anticipating several simultaneous strikes around the country, according to officers who drafted the plans.
Again, read the whole article. Crafted at the same time as the STRATCOM plan, this plan not only lays out military operations in the wake of a terrorist attack, but also lays out the framework for the breathtaking series of government contracts, executive orders and legislation that took place in 2006 preparing for the installation of a police state in the wake of a terrorist attack.
The Bush Administration, in public statements responding to inquiries about these plans, said they were "just contingency plans." Just exercises in imagination and "what-if?" scenarios so that preparations could be made. Just in case.
But since that time, actual operations carried out by the Administration show that these are not just contingency plans. These are plans which the Administration is actively planning to carry out, and carrying out. Every time an actual operation is exposed or another component of the plan is exposed, pundits and journalists debate the hypothetical Iran War and conclude that the consequences of actually carrying it out are so catastrophic that the Administration can't REALLY be planning to carry it out. It's all theater and posturing, they conclude.
After all, what possible MOTIVATION could there be for actually implementing the STRATCOM plan?
And that is the where the plan has been thwarted up until this time. Motivation. Cassis belli. All of the pieces are in place today to launch the Iran War Plan within hours. Except one. THE TRIGGER.
You've heard the pretexts that have been floated. I'll show, in succeeding installments, why they haven't worked. But they are all just cover for the real reason
Cheney to pitch nuclear
reactors during China trip
WASHINGTON - On a trip to China next week to talk about high-stakes issues like terrorism and North Korea, Vice President Dick Cheney will have another task -- making a pitch for Westinghouse's U.S. nuclear power technology.
At stake could be billions of dollars in business in coming years and thousands of American jobs. The initial installment of four reactors, costing $1.5 billion apiece, would also help narrow the huge U.S. trade deficit with China.
I don't want to run afoul of fair-use policy, so I won't quote the whole article. But this part has to be quoted:
[China's economic plan] calls for building as many as 32 large 1,000-megawatt reactors over the next 16 years.
And what do you need for nuclear reactors? Well, FUEL of course!
TEHRAN, May 25 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Friday Iran intends to become an exporter of nuclear fuel and not bow to international demands to stop producing it.
"Not only will we not halt the uranium enrichment centrifuges but we will quickly integrate them into our nuclear fuel cycle so as to become an exporter of nuclear fuel," Ahmadinejad said, RIA Novosti reported. Ahmadinejad said Tehran will defy any new U.N resolution demanding that the Iranians halt their nuclear program, which many in the international community suspect is aimed at producing a nuclear weapon.
"Many in the international community," eh? I'll get to that later when I debunk the pretexts for war Bush is pushing. But this, right here, IS THE REAL CASSIS BELLI.
Now, you might think that profits from the sale of nuclear fuel CAN'T possibly be the motivation for killing a million people and bombing a whole country back to the stone age and using nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear power, pre-emptively , no less, right?
Well, 280 billion dollars is a lot of money. And this is for a nuclear waste reprocessing effort to create new nuclear fuel from waste. What's the anticipated result of the program, funded with tax dollars? Why, lots of nuclear fuel for corporations to ship to other countries!
Under the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), a consortium of nations with advanced nuclear technologies would provide fuel and reactors sized to meet the grid and industry needs of other countries. By participating in GNEP, growing economies can enjoy the benefits of clean, safe nuclear power while minimizing proliferation concerns and eliminating the need to invest in the complete fuel cycle (e.g., reprocessing and enrichment). In cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, participating nations would develop international agreements to ensure reliable access to nuclear fuel.
Ok, so now do you get it? If Iran is in the nuclear fuel market, and they can produce nuclear fuel CHEAPER than the GNEP, then that's a lot of profit lost. And, since the reprocessing program is underwritten by TAX DOLLARS, it's PURE profit being lost. DECADES of pure profit locked in, by an oligarchical market that sets the price and controls supplies.
Now do the sanctions against Iran make sense? Bush keeps pointing to the sanctions as if they are proof that other countries see a "threat" from a nuclear-armed Iran.
The sanctions were imposed on Iran by the Great Powers even though Iran wasn't in violation of any treaties or UN Resolutions. It isn't illegal for them to process uranium for fuel under the watch of international inspectors! Bush is counting on the other Great Powers to back him up wrongfooting Iran with sanctions and resolutions that are baseless, and THIS nuclear fuel payday is the reason they are going along with him.
It's a foolish and dangerous game. They all know Bush's pretexts are BS, but they go along with him to pressure Iran out of the market. But they think that's the end of the game. They don't realize that the attack on Iran is an end in itself for Bush and Cheney, and that the nuclear fuel is the payday. Bush and Cheney aren't pushing sanctions to pressure Iran, they are pushing sanctions to build a case for war.
As we all know, there are other reasons to create another "fog of war." Like trying to confuse inquiries into the OTHER paydays for these gangsters.
