Pentagon prepares for war with Iran

my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
edited April 2008 in A Moving Train
Joint Chiefs Chairman Says US Preparing Military Options Against Iran
By Ann Scott Tyson
The Washington Post

Saturday 26 April 2008

The nation's top military officer said today that the Pentagon is planning for "potential military courses of action" against Iran, criticizing what he called the Tehran government's "increasingly lethal and malign influence" in Iraq.

Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a conflict with Iran would be "extremely stressing" but not impossible for U.S. forces, pointing specifically to reserve capabilities in the Navy and Air Force.

"It would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability," he said at a Pentagon news conference.

Still, Mullen made clear that he prefers a diplomatic solution to the tensions with Iran and does not foresee any imminent military action. "I have no expectations that we're going to get into a conflict with Iran in the immediate future," he said.

Mullen's statements and others by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates recently signal a new rhetorical onslaught by the Bush administration against Iran, amid what officials say is increased Iranian provision of weapons, training and financing to Iraqi groups that are attacking and killing Americans.

In a speech Monday at West Point, Gates said Iran "is hell-bent on acquiring nuclear weapons." He said a war with Iran would be "disastrous on a number of levels. But the military option must be kept on the table given the destabilizing policies of the regime and the risks inherent in a future Iranian nuclear threat."

Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, who was nominated this week to head all U.S. forces in the Middle East, is preparing a briefing soon to lay out detailed evidence of increased Iranian involvement in Iraq, Mullen said. The briefing will detail, for example, the discovery in Iraq of weapons that were very recently manufactured in Iran, he said.

"The Iranian government pledged to halt such activities some months ago. It's plainly obvious they have not. Indeed, they seem to have gone the other way," Mullen said.

He said recent unrest in the southern Iraqi city of Basra had highlighted a "level of involvement" by Iran that had not been understood by the U.S. military previously. "It became very, very visible in ways that we hadn't seen before," he said.

But while Mullen and Gates have recently stated that Tehran must know of Iranian actions in Iraq, which they say are led by Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Mullen said he has "no smoking gun which could prove that the highest leadership [of Iran] is involved in this."

In an incident early local time yesterday, a cargo ship contracted by the U.S. military fired "several bursts" of warning shots at two fast boats that approached in international waters off the Iranian coast, defense officials said today.

The unidentified small boats approached the Westward Venture, a ship carrying U.S. military hardware, as it headed north through the central Persian Gulf at about 8 a.m. local time, said Cmdr. Lydia Robertson, spokeswoman for the Navy's Fifth Fleet, which is based in Bahrain.

The U.S. ship initiated bridge-to-bridge communications, and, after receiving no response, it fired a flare. The speed boats continued to approach, so the ship fired warning shots with a .50-caliber machine gun and M16 rifle. The boats then left the area, she said.

"They fired several bursts, it went pretty quickly," Robertson said.

Soon afterwards, an Iranian coast guard boat queried the Western Venture, Robertson said. It was unclear whether that was one of the small boats.

"There have been some Iranian boats that have operated this way, and some unidentified boats," said Robertson, adding that the crew had no voice communication with the small boats.

In January, five Iranian patrol boats sped toward a U.S. warship and dropped small, boxlike objects in the water, an incident that alarmed military officials and that President Bush called "a provocative act." The objects turned out to pose no threat to the USS Port Royal or two other U.S. vessels accompanying it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/25/AR2008042501480.html?hpid=topnews
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    oh boy oh boy... i love it when the testosterone kicks in. :D:D
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • slightofjeffslightofjeff Posts: 7,762
    worry can be strength, with a plan
    everybody wants the most they can possibly get
    for the least they could possibly do
  • beachdwellerbeachdweller Posts: 1,532
    why is this a surprise, it's a problem that this statement was made by the joint chiefs, but the Pentagon has plans for war against everyone, even Ibiza I'm sure, lol. They have think tanks in that building that do nothing but create war plans under different scenario's against everyone.

    joint chiefs chairman needs to keep his political statements to himself though.
    "Music, for me, was fucking heroin." eV (nothing Ed has said is more true for me personally than this quote)

    Stop by:
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
  • Uncle LeoUncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    Can't seem to find this "Iran" on my map. Bomb Them!
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • SnakeSnake Posts: 2,605
    A theory would be that bush will go to war with Iran just at the end of his God forsaken term as president, and maybe that would make people more inclined to vote for McCain since he has a similar agenda or mindset or something :confused: . Just theory I heard, but still a possibility.
    Pirates had democracy too.

    "Its a secret to everybody."
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    Snake wrote:
    A theory would be that bush will go to war with Iran just at the end of his God forsaken term as president, and maybe that would make people more inclined to vote for McCain since he has a similar agenda or mindset or something :confused: . Just theory I heard, but still a possibility.
    mass murder to accompish political goals? sounds like Washington.
  • DixieNDixieN Posts: 351
    Commy wrote:
    mass murder to accompish political goals? sounds like Washington.

    The bogeyman has worked well for Bush and the Republicans. You have everything to fear, but most especially fear itself. Who's ready to kick whatever ass needs to be kicked? The Republicans! Of course, they'll send our kids instead of kicking any ass themselves. Small point. But, they're ready to Defend America, unlike the slimy, peace-at-any price (including your libery!) Democrats!!! Clinton and Obama want to stop defending America!!! Not the Republicans. No, sir. They will defend America against anything. Even things that pose no threat to America. American soldiers are dying for your freedom, people...not Republican political aims.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    i feel it is just a matter of time, and that Bush will not leave quietly or without a lot of drama (murder and mayhem)

    "its the end of the world as we know it and i feel fine......"
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    oh boy oh boy... i love it when the testosterone kicks in. :D:D

    Except it really isn't funny.
  • tybirdtybird Posts: 17,388
    There are probably basic military plans to attack every country in the world...like they say in the Boy Scouts, "Be Prepared."
    All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
  • worry can be strength, with a plan

    unchecked aggression can be a weakness, with an agenda.

    how are you not a republican?
Sign In or Register to comment.