It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
If the Bush administration, the New York Times, and the Washington Post get their way, the US military will commence with missile and air strikes against Iranian targets before the November elections.
Articles this morning both the Washington Post and the New York Times reprised their roles in the run-up to the Iraq war by beating the drums for war against Iran. Al Qaeda is no longer their favorite bogeyman as their focus has shifted to the regime in Iraq's neighbor to the east.
Clearly, both the New York Times and the Washington Post understand full well that their unquestioning regurgitation of administration talking points in late 2002 and early 2003 were low points in their journalistic enterprises. As such, it is difficult to understand how both news organizations could be retracing the same journalistic mistakes they made before the Iraq war with highly unreliable reporting from the likes of Judy Miller.
Let's be clear, we are not fighting Iranians or Al Qaeda in Iraq. We are fighting the Iraqis who are trying to gain control and drive out the US military occupation force. Any marginal influence by Al Qaeda or Iran is irrelevant compared to dealing with homegrown, Iraqi militias.
This is always the case with protracted military occupations of foreign countries. We tried to blame Cambodia for the problems in Vietnam, and began secretly bombing that country during the Vietnam War. As long as the US military occupies Iraq, and sows the seeds of civil war in that nation by our very presence, we will be fighting Iraqi militias on both sides of that civil war. A civil war made possible by US military intervention.
Bombing Iran under the pretense that they are engaging in a proxy war in Iraq will not solve any problems, but will exacerbate all problems faced by the US military there. It is possible that the administration is bluffing in order to prod Iran to back down on a number of issues. But that does not seem to be the Bush administration’s style, which prefers riding in on horseback and shooting wildly in all directions. Don't even bother asking questions later.
The US Defense Secretary Robert Gates has renewed allegations against Iran, claiming that Tehran's support for militias in Iraq has grown.
"I think that there is some sense of an increased level of supply of (Iranian) weapons and support to these groups," Gates claimed after a series of hearings on Capitol Hill on Friday.
"But whether it's a dramatic increase over recent weeks, I just don't know," AP quoted Gates as saying.
Asked what would be the response to the issue, Gates said the US will be as aggressive as possible to counter the increase in the Iranian activity in Iraq.
Gates and the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, repeated the same allegations made by the top US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, claiming that Iran was behind clashes between the Iraqi security forces and Shiite militias in Basra in late March.
Ever since President Nouri al-Maliki ordered the attacks in Basra on the Mahdi Army, Gen. David Petraeus has been laying the predicate for U.S. air strikes on Iran and a wider war in the Middle East.
Iran, Petraeus told the Senate Armed Services Committee, has "fueled the recent violence in a particularly damaging way through its lethal support of the special groups."
These "special groups" are "funded, trained, armed and directed by Iran's Quds Force with help from Lebanese Hezbollah. It was these groups that launched Iranian rockets and mortar rounds at Iraq's seat of government (the Green Zone) ... causing loss of innocent life and fear in the capital."
Originally posted by budski
The main stream media or MSM have a record of only reporting certain parts of the news deemed to be "clean" and fit for public consumption.
What we often get from the MSM is that party line which the government wants them to take.
Alternative news sources are often biased but give much more information.
As far as the MSM goes, the fox is now looking after the chicken coop.
Many ATS'ers think this and that's why you see the discussions you see - that MSM is not to be trusted.
Originally posted by Masisoar
Just drop it and stop trying to scare everyone.