Reply #106: BurtWorm, thought you might be interested in this NPR clip

[Emit]

I posted this on another thread, but thought it relates to some of your questions here.

This week, Washington's attention turned toward Iran, and vice versa. There were news reports that the White House is considering plans to attack Iran should that country proceed with its nuclear ambitions. The president calls it wild speculation.

Guests:

Joseph Cirincione, Carnegie Endowment for Peace

Michael Rubin, resident scholar at American Enterprise Institute

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5338707


It's all very complicated, and when listening to this, keep in mind that regime change in Iran has been a goal of many neoconservatives for many years now. Also, take into consideration when you listen who Michael Rubin is. According to rightweb:

Michael Rubin is one of the youngest neoconservative figures to gain prominence within the George W. Bush administration. A Yale graduate whose dissertation focused on modern Iran, Rubin has traveled extensively in Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Sudan. (1)

Rubin, an AEI scholar, was involved in several meetings and conferences officiated by Douglas Feith and Harold Rhode at AEI as part of the Bush transition team. One of the objectives of these meetings was to reshape the top leadership at the Pentagon, sidelining or removing those who were regarded as moderates. Out of these discussions came the idea for the creation of the Office of Special Plans (OSP). (10)

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1345

Just before the break, Joseph Cirincione, the guy from Carnegie Endowment for Peace, asked Rubin a very pointed question about regime change (whether this stuff going on is about the nukes or regime change) and then he mentions that AEI has had a desire for regime change in Iran in order to change the geopolitics in the area. After the break, Rubin responds and tries to spin the questions saying something like, "Well, I don't know where that came from..."

I think it is really important that we look at this Iran thing from a historical perspective involving the neoconservatives. I had read these articles recently (also posted on the other thread but relates here, too) that discuss, among other things, the neocons' history with regime change in Iran:

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1114/

Is Iran Next?
The Pentagon neocons who brought you the war in Iraq have a new target
By Tom Barry


and

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/porter.php?articleid=8778

Neocons Blocked 2003 Nuclear Talks With Iran

by Gareth Porter