Bush Supports Israeli Plan For Strike On Iran: Report

Last month Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker reported that the Bush Administration has stepped up covert operations inside Iran. Now the Times of London, citing information from a senior Pentagon official, says that Bush backs an Israeli plan for a strike on that country's nuclear facilities:

President George W Bush has told the Israeli government that he may be prepared to approve a future military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities if negotiations with Tehran break down, according to a senior Pentagon official.

Despite the opposition of his own generals and widespread scepticism that America is ready to risk the military, political and economic consequences of an airborne strike on Iran, the president has given an "amber light" to an Israeli plan to attack Iran's main nuclear sites with long-range bombing sorties, the official told The Sunday Times.

"Amber means get on with your preparations, stand by for immediate attack and tell us when you're ready," the official said. But the Israelis have also been told that they can expect no help from American forces and will not be able to use US military bases in Iraq for logistical support.

Nor is it certain that Bush's amber light would ever turn to green without irrefutable evidence of lethal Iranian hostility. Tehran's test launches of medium-range ballistic missiles last week were seen in Washington as provocative and poorly judged, but both the Pentagon and the CIA concluded that they did not represent an immediate threat of attack against Israeli or US targets.

"It's really all down to the Israelis," the Pentagon official added. "This administration will not attack Iran. This has already been decided. But the president is really preoccupied with the nuclear threat against Israel and I know he doesn't believe that anything but force will deter Iran."

Read the full report here.

Comments

[artsandminds]

What has caused the Bush Administration to be all over the place on this Iran issue, is that they are being pulled in different directions by their puppet masters. Iraq was easy for them, big oil, military industry and most important Israel were all a go, but Iran is very different. If Iran gets attached oil will shoot up big time and while the oil industry likes oil to be expensive, they don’t want it too expansive or politicians will stick it to them (you notice while oil has gone up $20+/barrel to $143.00, gas prices have still just floated around $4, big oil is very scared of nationalization). Industry, military and otherwise are definitely not on board, mostly due to the fact of what $200.00/barrol oil would do to the US economy, forget recession, it will cause a depression (of course we may go there anyway). So, that just leaves Israel, they are chomping at the bit to attack Iran with our weapons hoping that Iran will retaliate by hitting our (USA) ships and we (US) will strike back. Israel is a bully, who is using our soldiers, gold and good name (what left of it) for its own selfish goals. In the mean time I am enjoying watching Bush try to keep everyone happy, and looking as ineffectual as ever.

[wmbear]

THE "GOOD NEWS" IS...

If this happens, at least we'll all be driving electric cars in 10-years time (if we're still around, that is).

[DRaymond]

I think that many of you are overcomplicating this.

What will be the number one most immediate result of this story?

Oil prices will go up.

And what will be the number one most immediate result of oil prices going up?

Gas prices will go up.

And what will be the number one most immediate result of gas prices going up?

The Republicans will push for opening ANWR and the Outer Continental Shelf to drilling.

...and that was why the story was leaked. Any real preparations for a real attack would be classified at such a high level that there is no way they would have ended up in the newspapers.

[wmbear]

LET'S HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT...

It certainly sounds plausible....

[TheEmptinessOfTruthiness]

Perfectly plausible yes, but on the other hand this is exactly how Iraq got started.

[IneptitudePrideB4Fall]

The discussion about an attack on Iran is to soften up the American Dummies so that when the attack actually occurs, we Americans won't remember what those previous attack topics actually were. We remember something vague about Iran being our enemy; What was it that Iran was up to as the reason we have been planning to attack?; We just don't like Iran!; etc. And the politicians (of both stripes) will bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

And we will pay for this murdering with more than our money. Where is it written that it's OK for us and our "best friend" Israel to bomb, destroy, kill whenever, wherever and whomever it strikes our fancy but it's NO FAIR for those so mistreated to do the same back to us? I don't want retaliation to happen but retaliation is what I most fear.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[43P04T34]

Who could have predicted this?!?!

[quintus]

Actually, I posted several weeks back on this very scenario. I had just talked extensively with a non com officer who had recently come back from Iraq who told me that preparations for an attack on Iran with Israel's planes, ordinance, etc. was very far along. I found it interesting how quickly others posted in reply that this info couldn't possibly be credible because a non-com officer simply wouldn't have knowledge of such things. Gee, I guess they were wrong, huh?

[111]

Anyone over eight years old could have predicted this. Why do you think we've been stock piling Israel with arms that will deliver targeted nuclear warheads?

There was a plan - Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran

[jackie4444]

It is well past time that this country comes to terms with the fact that Israel IS a sovereign nation and
as such is responsible for fighting its own battles and resolving its own disputes with its neighbors.
60 years is more than enough time for Israel or any other fledging nation to have gotten its house in order and established a decent working relationship with its neighbors. I'm frankly tired of hearing about how Israel's 'security' and U.S. 'security are somehow joined at the hip. It is not true, and it has never BEEN true. Israel is one of a hundred nations whose location has some strategic value to the U.S. None of the others are treated in similar fashion.

Bush clearly has a desire to start another war before he leaves. His last chance to bring about his own personal vision of Armageddon before he goes back to barbecuing in Crawford. Israel has multiple nuclear devices AT THE READY. Iran presently has none. It could not possibly be any more clear that the only rationale for this 'pre-emptive' attack coming at this time is to insure that this
country can be dragged into another Middle East conflagration while Bush is in office. And if it
happens and the American people TOLERATE IT, we are just a guilty as he is.

[quintus]

Agreed. There are other, ancillary, reasons for a preemptive attack on Iran, i.e., it would likely give McCain's campaign a big boost.

The American people have been largely somambulant these last seven years. The Democrats in Congress mostly impotent.

And, sadly, many now are worried and freaked out about the economy here at home; they don't have a lot of attention focused on Iraq, Afghanistan, and now, Iran.

[bdd]

Can you say "$600.00 for a barrel of oil"????

[111]

can you say bicycle?

[oregonrain]

After Iran , who is next ? Syria, pakistan ?

[TheRebel82]

IMPEACH this disaster of a president!!!!!

[khristmaskathy]

The sad thing is: it would take longer to impeach him than he'll be in office anyway. And look who we'd be stuck with if he was gone... :( It's unreal what has happened these past years and nobody will stand up and say ENOUGH OF THE MADNESS!!!!!!

[Shaddup]

At this point shouldn't every headline just read "Bush Continues To Hold U. S. Hostage"?

[loki]

Of course he will. Then the PNAC and Neo Cons can have another of their planned wars in which the " use Americas Military might to dominate the globe" , and not be blamed on starting it.

[M1nkyb0y]

Duh...If an average Joe, such as myself, knew this was Bush's plan all along wouldn't an "enemy?"
Wouldn't that "enemy" have military planners that plan to counter this contingency? Mightn't they plan something terrible for their "enemies?"
Wasn't there something about how much a terrorist attack would help John McSame's chances for becoming our president?
This thing stinks of Rove.

[jollyelle]

i love it, time to upgrade "the i smell a rat" saying to " i smell a rove"!!!

[Amennyc]

Basic Math: Iran has NO weapons that could ever reach USA shores. They would never attack the country and frankly, have no desire to truly attack. This is all an Israeli / USA vendetta. Iran doesn't drink the kool-aid so they must be stopped. Even in the USA, anyone who speaks against the Bushits must be stopped. Iranian or American.. They'll even arrest an old librarian with a simple sign of McCain=Bush in the USA "land of free speech". Muchless, an Iran that tells USA and Israel to mind their own business- as they should. In the end it's not Bush's fault or Cheney's. It's the American people and Congress who allow the bull to run loose in the china shop. Outsiders don't understand at all, how the American people can just do nothing about all the war crimes and atrocities Bush has created. Imagine, torture alone! Not to add secret prisons, wire tapping, the list goes on.... Iran is not occupying any other sovereign nations land. It's Israel and USA that are doing that.

[hypnotoad72]

I saw that video. I too was curious, until I saw the thing in the pea pod-shaped outfit that had pictures of politicians on them... what happened before the cameraman whipped out his camcorder and pressed the record button? Is relevant context missing and, in short, that particular video being as relevant as any youtube clip of some dorky kids on skateboards prodding cops then clipping the film top make it look like the cops started the tussle?

[111]

There are too many in this country that dismiss ideas of protest, of civil disobedience and speaking out about the legalization and expansion of domestic spying programs as leftist, liberal and progressive. There are too many comments posted here that have said vocalizing dissension is just making trouble. I've read many comments that say it is a generational thing and that the liberals are the boomers who should just pass the torch and be quiet.

Democrats viciously attack the people who try to fight what is happening in this country as much as the neo-cons. It baffles my mind and caused Cindy Sheehan to step aside for a while because she could endure no more from Democrats attacking her.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Denny Hoyer and John Conyers are directly responsible for this because they voted against Kucinich's articles of impeachment against Cheney and then Bush and the third time have said only that they may consider impeachment hearings.

This is on the heads of everyone who voted for the Kyl - Lieberman bill in 2007. Bush could not have gotten this far without the Democrats.

History will judge us harshly and it should.

[YEShavesome]

Quoting Joe Lieberman: (from ABC News) http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/07/us-is-flashing.html?cid=122105806#comment-122105806

"the good news is that the American and Israeli militaries -- intelligence community, government -- work very closely together," the bad news is they're
working on another FALSE FLAG TERROR ATTACK just like on 9/11. Hey ABC News, are you gonna be in on this one too?

[ChiGuy]

Any time I see the words, "false flag" in a comment, I know to run the other way.

[jackie4444]

That's why its successful, Chi.

[DexGor]

Great, these are the same two intelligence communities that have been screaming that Iran would have a nuclear bomb "in 10 to 15 years" since the early 80s. That fills me a lot of confidence Joe!

[WatchIt]

Ritter said it would either be May-June OR Sept-Oct. Not just because of the political advantages this would give the GOP, but rather some very real cycles in the Pentagon that allows for the most focus during these times. Seems that June was not it. Will October be IT? Bush is only doing a very few things now as his term fades... or will it fade? Will we have an October surprise courtesy of the Israeli government? And a subsequent seizure of power made possible by a pair of Executive Directives in 2007? Hmm?

[RRK70]

Just remember that Petraeus is taking control of CentCom (middle east) in September. I think September/October action against Iran is quite likely. I don't think it helps McCain unless the US/Israel is perceived to be the "victim" i.e. Iran strikes first. Of course this perception can be manipulated in any number of ways.

[TheEmptinessOfTruthiness]

No doubt they have a dozen or two Gulf of Tonkin contingency plans on the table.

[theillusion]

Empires devour democracy

[BubbaC33]

Wasn't Great Britain an empire for a very long time, while also being a democracy?

[theillusion]

What do you consider a "very long time"? Britain's empire was powerful and ultimately played a major role in shaping our current global situation, but their power as an empire did not last "a very long time". Could women vote in their democracy? I'm not talking about democracy in theory, but in practice.

[111]

Britain has never been a democracy. We aren't either, we are a Republic. You did know that didn't you?

[RacePace7]

History shows that Israel definitely has a better track record of preemptive wars than Bush does. In 1981, rather than wait until the smoking gun evidence came in the form of a mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv, Israeli jets took out Saddam Hussein's nuclear plant in one fell swoop. Israeli troop casualties: Zero. Total cost to Israeli taxpayers: Nada.

22 years later, Bush and his closest advisers took an entirely different approach. US troop casualties: 4118. Cost to US taxpayers: Currently $10 - 12 billion a month, totalling over $600 billion.

Last September, Israel took out Syria's nuclear plant in one fell swoop. No Israeli casualties, no cost to Israeli taxpayers, no mushroom cloud over Tel Aviv.

To this day, Bush says that commiting US troops and US taxpayers money to eliminate the threat of a mushroom cloud forming over a US city was the right thing to do. Now it looks like he's starting to realize Israel has a much more cost-effective solution to deal with Middle East madmen. (Plus he realizes our own military is presently stretched too thin fighting elsewhere.)

[RRK70]

The nuclear genie will never be contained. You cannot name a time in history when a technology has ever been contained. Thanks to our allies in Pakistan (Mr. Khan in particular), nuclear proliferation in the Middle East may be at all all-time high. Even if Israel or the US prevents ALL nations from uranium enrichment, it's going to practically be impossible to control the transport of enriched uranium or a nuclear device itself. Israel's tactical success in countering neighboring states nuclear programs cannot be equated with long term strategic success.

[LORISNJ]

Because we all know that it is so much easier to bomb a country than to make peace with them. And your argument that Israel did it so it must be ok is nonsense. We can destroy every country on Earth, so what? Does that mean every time a world leader doesn't do what we want, we blast them to kingdom come? What kind of world do you want?

The Israel/U.S. plans on another preemptive strike - just in time for the November elections, how nice for Mr. McCain.

[RacePace7]

I don't agree that it's easier to bomb a country than to exercise other options. The Cold War ended without any bombs being dropped--and the Soviets had 30,000 verifiable nuclear warheads pointed at us.

By comparison, Iraq had a few mobile weapons labs. In case anyone forgets, a month and a half after Shock and Awe started, US and Kurdish troops supposedly found the smoking gun evidence--2 mobile weapons labs. Bush spoke glowingly of the troops discovery on May 29, 2003, declaring, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."

If there is an Israeli/US preemptive strike on Iran just in time for the November election, I don't see how that bolsters McCain's claim that our safety and security is completely tied into the Iraq war. Hate to break the news to you, John, but the ones who masterminded 9/11 currently have safe haven in Pakistan and the Afghanistan war is sliding sideways.

No one knows what Iran's response would be if they are attacked. Except that the price of gas will go through the roof. Which reminds me--when is McCain going to introduce his summer gas tax holiday bill for hard working Americans?

[AnotherMcIntosh]

"History shows that Israel definitely has a better track record of ..."

Plus, history has shown that they could attack any one of our ships, such as the U.S.S. Liberty, without any adverse consequences.