Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Newsweek:Rumors of War

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 06:12 AM
Original message
Newsweek:Rumors of War
Jalal Sharafi was carrying a video-game, a gift for his daughter, when he found himself surrounded. On that chilly Sunday morning, the second secretary at the Iranian Embassy in Baghdad had driven himself to the commercial district of Arasat Hindi to checkout the site for a new Iranian bank. He had ducked into a nearby electronics store with his bodyguards, and as they emerged four armored cars roared up and disgorged at least 20 gunmen wearing bulletproof vests and Iraqi National Guard uniforms. They flashed official IDs, and manhandled Sharafi into one car. Iraqi police gave chase, guns blazing. They shot up one of the other vehicles, capturing four assailants who by late last week had yet to be publicly identified. Sharafi and the others disappeared.

At the embassy, the diplomat's colleagues were furious. "This was a group directly under American supervision," said one distraught Iranian official, who was not authorized to speak on the record. Abdul Karim Inizi, a former Iraqi Security minister close to the Iranians, pointed the finger at an Iraqi black-ops unit based out at the Baghdad airport, who answer to American Special Forces officers. "It's plausible," says a senior Coalition adviser who is also not authorized to speak on the record. The unit does exist—and does specialize in snatch operations.

The Iranians have reason to feel paranoid. In recent weeks senior American officers have condemned Tehran for providing training and deadly explosives to insurgents. In a predawn raid on Dec. 21, U.S. troops barged into the compound of the most powerful political party in the country, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, and grabbed two men they claimed were officers in Iran's Revolutionary Guards. Three weeks later U.S. troops stormed an Iranian diplomatic office in Irbil, arresting five more Iranians. The Americans have hinted that as part of an escalating tit-for-tat, Iranians may have had a hand in a spectacular raid in Karbala on Jan. 20, in which four American soldiers were kidnapped and later found shot, execution style, in the head. U.S. forces promised to defend themselves.

Some view the spiraling attacks as a strand in a worrisome pattern. At least one former White House official contends that some Bush advisers secretly want an excuse to attack Iran. "They intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something would be forced to retaliate for," says Hillary Mann, the administration's former National Security Council director for Iran and Persian Gulf Affairs. U.S. officials insist they have no intention of provoking or otherwise starting a war with Iran, and they were also quick to deny any link to Sharafi's kidnapping. But the fact remains that the longstanding war of words between Washington and Tehran is edging toward something more dangerous. A second Navy carrier group is steaming toward the Persian Gulf, and NEWSWEEK has learned that a third carrier will likely follow. Iran shot off a few missiles in those same tense waters last week, in a highly publicized test. With Americans and Iranians jousting on the chaotic battleground of Iraq, the chances of a small incident's spiraling into a crisis are higher than they've been in years.

more
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17086418/site/newsweek/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 06:20 AM
Response to Original message
1. Of course the neocons want a war.
The Downing Street Memo showed how Bush & Blair were baiting Saddam before the Iraq invasion, hoping that he would shoot down one of their planes in the no-fly zone to provide a casus belli. Now they're taunting the Iranians with the same purpose in mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
2. It is sort of like a drunk father in a family
I have seen families that are headed up by drunks and they leave every thing in a mess from their way out thinking. I sometimes hate to read a paper or this site and see what else this group in the WH has done. What works right any more? If Bush get even near it it is gone. Another war? My God can one even think about it. I do think he will bomb Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GenDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. So true
That is a great analogy. I have an alcoholic brother in law and on the occasions where he is getting his buzz on -- he will goad, pick, and prod at his family until they react. After the reaction, full out escalation ensues. The neocons are doing the same with Iran. Prodding and waiting for the reaction.

Their biggest roadblock, however, is the American people who are on to them finally. You have to wonder what they have up their sleeves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Delphinus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Do you really think the American people are on to them?
Please tell me - I need to see what you see!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GenDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. 65% of the American people disapprove of Bush and his war.
That seems to me to be a majority of the people. The 2006 elections were a referendum against the Iraq war. If that isn't being onto them, I don't know what is. The people do not want war with Iran. Can a president go to war without the American people? I guess he can. I just read this article by John Dean. Very scary. I just hope that our representatives can stop him.

Leading Experts Say Congress Must Stop An Attack on Iran: Is That Constitutionally Possible?
Absolutely - According to Experts on Both Sides of the Aisle
By JOHN W. DEAN


http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20070209.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. strangely enough
i doubt that bushco will have the same type of success in fooling people about iran ; that of course does not mean that the US won't attack

i don't think people will follow this time, for some reason
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GenDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. I agree
Even many of the right wingers have lost the stomach for war. If the neocons go for it; I believe that the people will rise up in huge numbers to protest against it.

What I do worry about -- are they evil enough to pull some kind of new Pearl Harbor II? Anything to bring the sheeple back in lock step. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-12-07 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. I think more see what is going one but-----always a but
I think we always have people who think that they are better than they really are. An army that can not be beat etc. Force is always the way. These seem to be deep seated things in peoples thinking and I hardly think these types will give it up. I also do not think people like Bush give in to much. They are sure they were born to rule and have God on their side and are right. Once you put a man in power like that with no control over him you get what you put in. Not that we have not had very good people who were like that but since the bad ones leave such a mess behind them they seem to be the ones we recall. Just take two from history. One left his country a lot worse than when he came in and one left it a lot better than she found it and it was daughter and father and both thought God gave them the job. Of course I am speaking of Henry and Elizabeth. Henry seemed to think he was right about every thing and he was all important in it, and Elizabeth tended to think she had to be right for , as she said, her people. They were interesting as two from one family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprobate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. Bush's problem is far more pathological than just being an alcoholic.


This Article explains his real problem.

It has to do with feeling inadequate in relation to his father. Since he believes that he will never measure up to his father's achievements his actions assure that he will always fail. Kind of a self fulfilling prophesy.

IOW, our illustrious leader is self destructive, and that means that he is assuring that he destroys the entire nation.

Makes sense when you look at everything he's done in the past. Everything he's done has ended in failure and required his fathers friends to bail him out. Only this time, when his father sent his friend Jim Baker and the ISG to get him out of trouble the boy wonder thru a temper tantrum and refused to take their advice. He opted instead for more of the same decisions that have failed so many times in the past. May I suggest that such a decision if prima facie proof that our president is 'round the bend'?

I don't know how his actions could psychologically be impeachable, but the actions and their results in the face of known facts should certainly be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. megalomaniacal
have you noticed all their appeals to 'History' ; as if we here in the present are incapable of seeing the 'war on terror' for what is and only future generations will be able to appreciate it

'History' will vindicate them in other words
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Auggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
3. Why not? There's more money to be made off a second war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ellipsis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
7. Oils well that ends well
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. Very damning stuff in there. Michael Hirsh can expect some calls from the WH.
Let's hope he handles those differently than Russert.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sarcasmo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
9. Looks like a spring time bombing for Iran, IMHO of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC