White House Leak: Cheney's Plan for Iran Attack Starts With Israeli Missile Strike

White House Leak: Cheney's Plan for Iran Attack Starts With Israeli Missile Strike

alternet.org

In the scenario concocted by Cheney's strategists, Washington's first step would be to convince Israel to fire missiles at Iran's uranium enrichment plant in Natanz. Tehran would retaliate with its own strike, providing the US with an excuse to attack military targets and nuclear facilities in Iran.

This information was leaked by an official close to the vice president. Cheney himself hasn't denied engaging in such war games.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Is he mad?
An Israeli attack on ANY arab country would immediately see the others rush to their aid - whether they're allies or not, whether they hate Iran or not.

It really is starting to seem like Cheney is trying to start WW3 - or is he hoping to subdue the entire region one country at a time by either diplomatic or violent means.

alternet.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

GREAT FIND!

This is a very significant story, IMHO. I am shocked that it hasnt been picked up on by the ATS regulars and struck with fast replies. But is is just and hour and 5 mins old, give it time.

It makes logical sense! Now that I think about it... I dont know why Israel hasnt instigated armed onflict with Iran yet. Israel knows that even if they start a brawl, the US will come in on the Israeli side.

The US is like a big mean dog and Israel has us on the leash!
When the US decides to hit Iran it will be in retaliation. Either Iran will be caught or framed in some offensive act. Or Iran and Israel will exchange blows with the US comming in to lay the smack down:

SHOCK & AWE II: W rides again. YEEHAW!

ummm are there any legitimate news agencies reporting on this
I have been searching the net and can not find any neither here
in the U.S. or through my European proxy..

I would be interested if this was not from Alternet and Daily Kos


Respectfully
GEO

As much as i'd be inclined to disagree, it's not the first time false-flag attempts have been used against Iran - Operation Ajax springs to mind as an example of this.

I fail to see why the west has such a big issue with Iran, other than that Isreal seems to have a problem.

But then, Isreal seems to have a problem with everyone who isn't a capitalist dog.

There is an old proverb that goes;

"He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones"

This plan, if true, is dangerous and has the potential to create huger problems in the area. As a member put it, it would cause the Arab nations to rush to the add of Iran.

I really don't like the idea of Iran and Syria getting support from our Arab allies.

reply to post by geocom


The two writers and Der Spiegel are credited at the top of the page - here
is the link to the article carried in der spiegel, pretty much exactly the same as the alternet article. I've only just got to it because I've been out, but it is nice to verify the story.

And some more in a similar vein, here
by the same authors.

[edit on 26/10/2007 by budski]

Actually for what I have been reading for a while around in the net it is Israel the one that is planning this attack.

but US is the one holding them back because the instability of Iraq. If it wasn't because Iraq has been so reluctant to embrace US taking of their resources the attacks on Iran by Israel would have been done with by now.

So is this news? yes it is and important ones, but it is new? no is not the speculation has been around for quite some time since the plans against Iraq started.

reply to post by marg6043


The speculation may have been around for a while, but the whitehouse leak is new, and reported in der spiegel, for which I have now included a link to the relevant page, in english.

Originally posted by budski


Is he mad?
An Israeli attack on ANY arab country would immediately see the others rush to their aid - whether they're allies or not, whether they hate Iran or not.

Again, Iran is not an Arab country. It is Islamic, but Persian for the most part. Generalizations are almost always a bad thing. Don't you think we have talked with our allies in the region about things like this?

That is why I said is news and important ones, but is not new, Israel was ready to procee with the attacks back in 2005 but got the thumps down by the US at the time.

At the outset of Bush's second term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell. He hinted, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was "right at the top of the list" of the rogue enemies of America, and that Israel would, so to speak, "be doing the bombing for us", without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them "to do it":

www.globalresearch.ca...

Just one of the many instances that the plans has been on the making.

The key is when.

I'm afraid that there is no stopping action against Iran!! The Rhetoric out of Washington to gain support for this conflict is at an all time high!! Of course, there is still a lot of reluctance, so it makes sense for Cheney and the War Mongers to use Israel to begin this conflict!!! If Israel attacks first, than I do feel that WW3 will truly start and the plan for Global Domination will be at an all time high. I fear for the planet!!!!

The fact that these things leak out to sites like this is either a sign of their power getting weaker or a intentional move for some reason.

Interesting thread.

reply to post by pavil


In answer to this, I'd like to point out what happened during GW1 and the scud attacks on Israel - the diplomatic pressure on Israel not to retaliate was intense - for the simple reason that other countries in the region would immediately have sided with saddam. That was why they were bombed in the first place - saddam wanted to inflame the whole area.

I know that "arab" is a bit of a catchall term and not really correct. I used it in order to be succinct and to get the point across.

I would also question whether we have any REAL allies in the area, or just allies of convenience - after all, the people are muslim and one of the tenets of their faith is to protect their muslim brothers against aggression.

Originally posted by budski

An Israeli attack on ANY arab country would immediately see the others rush to their aid - whether they're allies or not, whether they hate Iran or not.

Well, please explain why the Israeli bombing raid last month
against a peaceful Syria... went by without retaliation
by all these Arab neighbors??

i suspect a bombing attack on Iran's nuclear facility would
receive the same kind of reaction from neighboring Arab nations.

I believe that an attack on Iran at this point after a foreign invasion of Iraq tuned into fiasco will bring support by the other countries in the region even if they are not Persians.

Why because no matter what the middle east belong to the Arabs with exception of Israel and Iran is part of the middle east regardless.

I don't think that the countries now supporting the 2.2 million exile Iraqis will be very happy to support double that amount with Iran.

The humanitarian crisis will be to big to be ignored like Iraq has been thanks to propaganda.

reply to post by St Udio


That would be the goal if that is all Cheney, Bush and Haliburton wants, the problem is that if Cheney's goal is to control Iran's resources and have access for Haliburton to profit, its no going to end with just the taken of the nuclear facilities.

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by pavil

 

I would also question whether we have any REAL allies in the area, or just allies of convenience - after all, the people are muslim and one of the tenets of their faith is to protect their muslim brothers against aggression.

Aren't most allies, one's of convenience?

If it is in your interest, you tend to be an ally. Sunni Arab States will not weep when Shia Persian Iran's influence over the region is diminished. They may offer the proper words but make no mistake, they do not like Iran and it's meddling beyond it's borders.

Politics and Religions make for strange bedfellows sometimes. Remember, Israel once gave weaponry to the Islamic Republic of Iran and Iran welcomed it. Doesn't get much weirder than that.

Unfortunetly, time will probably tell which of us is right.

I'd really like to see the documents and the scenario that they drew up in relation to this - unlikely, I know.

Another question that occurs to me is WHY was this leaked - to make the attack more palatable by implanting it in the public consciousness perhaps?
We have been seeing an awful lot of this type of stuff after all.....

How come people always overlook China?

Just think of the economic slavery China could hold the US to if it wanted to.

China has major interests in Iran, as does Russia.

Russia can't harm the US outside of using military action, which I believe they will if we attack Iran.

China is the major player here. They have the means and the will to dictate to us what we will and will not do in nations that they have a particular interest in. Iran is DEFINITELY one of those nations.

I firmly believe that China and China alone is the reason we have not attacked Iran yet. No, I have no links or anything to back this up, because it's just my opinion, but when you look at their massive amount of US dollars, and just how economically dependent we are on them, it makes perfect sense.

They're a very quiet country, but you can never overlook them. They are clearly very good at the behind the scenes political chess match. Simply because they don't have to come out and talk tough like the US and Russia doesn't mean they aren't as important.