Today the BBC reported that war plans for Iran were complete. But the BBC clearly buried the lede on this. It's not news that the US has completed its target set on Iran. William Arkin reported on Iran war-gaming and planning last year in his blog, Early Warning and in the Washington Post.
The disturbing news revealed in this article is the revelation of two supposed triggers that would lead to an American attack on Iran. The first, says the BBC, is "confirmation that Iran was developing a nuclear weapon. . . ." Now, whether you think a nuclear Iran is a good or bad idea, this trigger has been made clear for quite some time. So, no surprise here.
But what of that second trigger? The "alternative [trigger is] a high-casualty attack on US forces in neighbouring Iraq," writes the BBC.
This is entirely too vague a trigger, especially for this President, if you ask me. Bush is not to be trusted with vague 'triggers,' or any kind of triggers at all, really.
So, what do Pelosi and Reid have to say about this? Has the Bush Administration denied this? Or issued a non-denial denial?
The BBC article is not long on specifics, so perhaps the US media might do some journalism and pin someone down on this?
The articulation of a casus belli for war with a nation of 70 million people sounds kind of important to me.