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

[springsm]

Well the Zionists are poised and bush doesn't know what he is doing. I wonder if there is ANYTHING that can stop him from being so egotistically wrong. Bush is really very scary and now that he is losing so badly, he can just about do anything. He knows the Democrats won't and can't stop him, Pelosi didn't and won't and bush really doesn't have the capacity to care.

[theillusion]

A perpetual state of war is just what the doctor ordered. When was the last time anybody actually declared war??? People are complaining about FISA, that was just the tip of the iceberg. FISA, The Patriot ACT, combined with numerous under-the-radar laws will destroy all domestic opposition to the ruling party (not the Republicans or Democrats).

The Iraqi government is finally trying to rhetorically grow a backbone but the Bushies are not interested what Iraq wants. We can't withdraw troops from the region if Iran gets bombed. Israel wants a buffer between them and Iran, US in Iraq. But we can always pull out of Iraq and sell the Saudis, Israel, and Iraq enough weapons to create a explosive atmosphere. There is so much going on behind closed doors and money being exchanged that bombing Iran is inevitable.

[oregonrain]

Lets not forget HR1955, or , the Protect America Act .

[hypnotoad72]

Whatever.

For people to say "This is gonna happen, ooga booga, you do something about it" and then do their part either... only goes to show their own disinterest, cowardice, selfishness, whatever. It reminds me of that Trek episode from 1968; a society with two warring factions -- Commissioner Bele and the fugitive Lokai. All Lokai did was whine about being oppressed and tried to convince everyone else to do his work for him.

[theillusion]

Whats make you think that because I have my own perception of the context that I'm currently operating in, that I don't do my part. My role may be different from your role but don't assume I'm sitting around playing with pencils all day.

[teembee]

Where is the Democratic leadership?

[TovSquirrel]

Firmly behind our unitary president, or so it would seem.

[111]

Find out who voted for the Kyl-Lieberman bill and you will see who wants the US to be involved in an unprovoked attack on Iran. Ms. Clinton for one.

[wmbear]

Don't ask.

[meanguy]

"democratic leadership" is like "jumbo shrimp", "compassionate conservatism", or "liberal thought"

[gladys46]

Our country needs a better class of people as its leaders!!

[kardwell]

Our country needs a better class of citizens. Bush might have rigged the election, but there were also millions of people who voted for him, and yet still millions who support his lunacy. Not to mention the millions who might not support nor approve, but whom are pathetically negligent in their responsibility to keep all of our legislators on task in representing our best interests, protecting our rights, and upholding the Constitution of the United States.

[maxdenn]

Notice how yesterday the leader of the Israeli government says his country is closer than ever to a peace agreement with the Palestinians, and today the story is that Bush supports an Israeli attack on Iran?

[TheEmptinessOfTruthiness]

Its quite simple really. When you're acting in the European theatre you talk about peace, for the American crowd you give 'em showdowns at high noon.

[Ozy]

Is Impeachmen still off the table Nancy?

[SaulGood]

i take it you haven't heard the latest....­.

Pelosi has said previously that impeachment "was off the table," so her comments this morning were surprising, and clearly signaled a new willingness to entertain the idea of ousting Bush, although no one in the Democratic leadership believes that is likely since the president has only six months left in this term.

"This is a Judiciary Committee matter, and I believe we will see some attention being paid to it by the Judiciary Committee," Pelosi told reporters. "Not necessarily taking up the articles of impeachment because that would have to be approved on the floor, but to have some hearings on the subject."

Pelosi added: "My expectation is that there will be some review of that in the committee.­"

b rad b log

[ChiGuy]

It never was ON the table because it would never be successful.
Unless, of course, you have a way to convince 16 party-befo­re-country Republicans to vote in its favor.
THEN, you'd have something.

[hypnotoad72]

What if Ms. Pelosi knows something nasty about Iran most of us don't? That's JUST as plausible as any other tinfoil hat explanation conjectured by people.

[maxdenn]

I need to get this straight. Most Americans don't think the Iraq war is worth fighting. Our prez is at a 25% approval rating. George W. Bush, and McCain want to bomb Iran. Obama was against attacking Iraq. But Newsweek reports a dead heat in the presidential race? I don't get it.

[Shaddup]

I do. It's one of the laws of stupidity. There are always more more stupid people than you thought there were. I believe the next law is to never underestimate their stupidity.

[who38]

Makes you think twice about a jury trail, doesn't it?

[Birdman]

When you consider racial attitudes in this country it ain't hard to figure out. After all did you think that woman from Pennsylvania really had an issue with Obama's lack of a flag pin? After all McCain hardly ever wears a flag pin. This woman as well as many Americans have an issue with Obama ethnicity but will glom on to some non issue instead to explain away why they will not vote for him. We shoudl focus on the issues but I know with the 48 percent voting for McCain most are not looking at the issues.

[meanguy]

ahh, so it's the bigots who are keeping obama from simply taking over, huh???? oooooookay­yyyy....go­od luck with that...

[khristmaskathy]

...and overall approval of Congress? Even lower than Bush's approval rating!

[hpeacor]

If America uses military action against Iran it would be a huge mistake. I've read that a large portion of young Iranians are becoming more and more instilled with democratic values (internet, free speech, want of political reform, and the sense that these are goals within reach) it seems like we should be developing and supporting this part of the population in hopes for reform to come from the inside-out; ergo, peacefully. But, if we attack Iran then all the differences between the current regime and the people who are represented by it would disappear for the sake of a long and proud history of it's people. An attack of any kind on Iran will only strengthen it's sense of nationalism. The Iranian government was smart in the placement of these nuclear facilities, putting them near cities with large populations of Iranian civilians. Also, most of these facilities that we do know about were hidden and it is hard to speculate that U.S. intelligence is aware of every single one. It's an extremely high risk possibility to be leaning towards, especially when there are other options that have yet to be explored.

[chirps]

Please stop. We don't want reason to enter into this.

[hypnotoad72]

If true, then Amanaenedajobbie or whatever his name is would implode from within.

Seems better than an external influence imposing, I agree...

Of course, if the US attacks their nuclear power stations (which I thought they weren't allowed to have, never mind all the cheap gas and oil they pump out of their own backyards so why would they want nuclear?), there goes half their potential army... if that's really what's going on.

I'm hardly an expert on the subject, but here's a link that should concern everybody;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4031603.stm

I think there's more to what's going on than any neocon conspiracy, Rovianism, et cetera and especially as more than just the US is involved, it adds that much more weight for naysayers to admit this might be a genuine concern.

[JeffersonState]

This headline goes in the no shi'ite category.

[harriscrl3]

Armageddon is upon us. You have Hagee talking about some nonsense on Iran/Israel show down then you have Bush supporting Israel's plan to attack Iran. Not to mention we cant even fix whats going on in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mark my words we are going ot regret that this President was never impeached. Thank you Nancy Pelosi youre place is history is MADE.

Carol

[kardwell]

Each and every Republican will be held responsible and accountable for the impending nuclear strike on Iran.

[craneman]

not only that kardwell, but any and all who voted for these morons in the first ( and second ) place.

[meanguy]

hahahahaha­...did you think up the 'tought guy talk' all by yourselves, or did the rest of the hanna montana fan club help you?

[druidlady42]

" if negotiations with Tehran break down"

Well, that's easy to arrange! Remember Bush falsely claiming , as an excuse to attack Iraq, that Sadaam had thrown the inspectors out, when it was he who demanded they leave? Remember how he talked with Tony Blair about arranging a "false flag" incident using a fake UN plane over Iraq to precipitate an excuse to attack Sadaam? The plans have already been laid; Bush has nothing to lose at this point; so negotiations will conveniently "break down" right before the November election!

Message to our USELESS, COWARDLY CONGRESS:-----The ONLY thing which will stop this from happening is the PROMISE OF SWIFT AND SURE IMPEACHMENT if Bush and Cheney ignore the counsel of our leading military experts, DOD and State Dept. officials, and the best interests of the American people and the United States!

One thing is sure: any attack by Israel on Iran will be done with the explicit approval, military support, and coordination with the United States, as the people of Lebanon tragically experienced! There will be no "plausible deniability"! The rest of the world (mayby not the American people) will see this for what it is: another aggressive, preemptive attack on another country, clearly against every moral and international law!

[DexGor]

Even worse, any Israeli air-strike is going to have to use Iraqi airspace, meaning blatant US assistance in any attack. Think about the uprising in Iraq if that happens, among both Shi'i and Sunni. Think about the widespread implications. After the Lebanon war, opinion polls showed that Nasrallah (the SHI'I head of Hezbollah) and Ahmadinejad (the PERSIAN, SHI'I president of Iran) were the most popular politicians on the SUNNI ARAB street. Anyone who thinks that the entire Middle East will explode is stupid or delusional. And all the anger will be aimed at the US and Israel.

[piul05]

What else is new? It is not as if Bush worries about little , unimportant details such as consequences. Or hard evidence . Or international law. Or America's future. Or the fate of human beings, anywhere.

[Wozzeck]

Of course Bush, Cheney, and the usual neocons are banging the war drums, but AIPAC has most of the Democrats afraid to put America before Israel. The only Dems who aren't afraid of AIPAC are those who are in ideological lockstep with it.

We are going bankrupt borrowing money from China to fight proxy wars for Israel, Big Oil, and the military industrial complex.

Demand that your congressperson reject AIPAC's string pulling.

[flipbiscut24]

American politicians clearly do not represent America.

[SuiginTou7]

Has Isreal paid attention to George's track record? I mean the man has batted 1000 in making horrible decisions. One bomb that falls on Iran, Iran WILL unleash groupes like Hezbolia (Sorry about the spelling) agaisnt Isreal. Anything the shrub approves, I would run for the hills...