Kudos to ABC News for Uncovering Israel's Iran Attack Plans Issues Beyond Palo Alto, posted by a, a resident of the Adobe-Meadows neighborhood, on Jul 1, 2008 at 7:35 pm
An attack on Iran would wreak further havoc on the U.S. economy. The Bush administration along with Cheney, both with private ties to the oil industry, would rather that oil prices go higher so they can cash in on their no-bid Iraq contracts. Bush and the administration would rather keep the American people in the dark and suck up all our money in the debts we owe and the high oil prices.
Thank you ABC News for bringing to light what those in power secretly scheme to do to the detriment of the American people! This is finally journalists doing their job - informing the public of secret acts by the government. This is a true act of patriotism, serving as watch dogs on those in power. Now, the public is informed and can act accordingly to stop Israel's path of destruction of America.
Posted by Reader, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 1, 2008 at 9:08 pm
ABC news may have been the first TV news to reveal a possible attack by Israel on Iran to the U.S. public, but they certainly were not the first to report it. I've been reading about a possible attack for more than a week in the U.K. papers and DW TV.
They reported extensively on the exercises the Israeli air force had over the Eastern Mediterranean in preparation for a possible attack. However, analysts said that it was doubtful Israel would show it's hand with these very public military exercises but hopefully it would be a warning to Iran.
Posted by Peter, a resident of another community, on Jul 1, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh has an excellent article about the American plans to attack Iran in the coming months in the upcoming issue of The New Yorker Magazine.
Entitled,Preparing the Battlefield: The Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran, the article talks about how the administration got $400 million dollars for covert lethal operations in Iran, which are occurring now.
Posted by A Boomer, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jul 1, 2008 at 10:31 pm
The Shrub administration has amply demonstrated its delusional personality, and inability to learn from anything. Not prior history or its own. It does not think through or plan for the consequences of actions it chooses to take, mopping up is not part of their job description.
Gates is a good SecDef, but their are numerous red flags waving here. The outspoken admiral who was over the entire Middle East theater got fired at the behest of the White House, and Patreus is nominated to succeed him. Patreus seems like a capable guy, but he also seems to have an allegiance to the Shrubbies.
Gates appropriately dismissed the civilian and military heads of the Air Force for reasons "unrelated" to the situation with Iran, but with new people at those positions, one cannot help but wonder how much those guys will take positions in opposition to the White House should orders come down before next January 20. And maybe the guys that got fired had expressed their doubts about an air attack on Iran? We may never know.
Gates himself has called for more diplomatic engagement on a number of measures, including Iran, but if the White House is claiming that "time is running out" (meaning their reign of terror, not dealing with the Iran problem intelligently) he very well could be forced to resign rather than follow orders. Much as what occurred with the Nixon White House and the Justice Department during the Watergate scandal.
Iran is a rogue state and must be dealt with. There is no evidence of an imminent danger to this country or Israel that can justify a pre-emptive military strike by either country in the next year, while the Shrub Administration holds office.
Posted by Walter E. Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2008 at 7:42 am
"Iran is a rogue state and must be dealt with. There is no evidence of an imminent danger to this country or Israel that can justify a pre-emptive military strike by either country in the next year, while the Shrub Administration holds office."
A nation that openly advocates the inceneration of another nation is beyond the reach of talk. Combine threat with capability and only a fool will suggest waiting for disaster.
Posted by Rudy, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2008 at 11:28 am
There is one way to assure peace in the Middle East, and to once and for all solve the Israel problem: That's to elect the one person who has agreed to meet both with our enemys and our friends. Only by talking to our opponents can we resolve our differences.
Obama has the respect and admiration of Muslims and only he can broker just peace and harmony in the Middle East.
If you want peace and prosperity for all God's children, elect Obama.
Posted by Dr. Ferragamo, a resident of Stanford, on Jul 2, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Like I said: NO MUSLIM NATION HAS EVER ATTACKED USA.
Kuwaitis were slant-drilling and Iraq was justified in stopping it. We had no business attacking Iraq and helping the Kuwaiti dictatorship in 1991.
After the USA overthrew the elected leader of Iran in 1953, USA organized death and torture squads that terrorized and murdered innocent Iranian civilians for decades. They were COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED in using violent means to remove USA from their nation.
It wss Israel who attacked Arab nations in 1948, 1955, 1967, 1971, etc. When did an Arab nation ever attack Israel? The sooner Israel is abolished, the better.
Saddam was a zionist puppet, set up by zionist interests to be knocked down for zionist interests.
USA has no business participating in the slaughter of innocent, peaceful, helpless Muslims.
Posted by Boaz, a resident of the Greater Miranda neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Dr Ferragamo--I love you revisionist history vis a vis--Israel attacking the arab nation ( as some examples look up the war in 1973--read how Egypt and Syria attacked Israel then or look up how all of Israel's neighbors attacked Israel in 1948 right after the establishment of the State of Israel.)
Posted by Dr. Ferragamo, a resident of Stanford, on Jul 2, 2008 at 1:20 pm
In 1973 Egypt and Syria did not attack Israel. Egypt and Syria were DEFENDING their own territory which Israel had been illegally occupying since 1967.
USA would have NEVER given Saddam chemical weapons if the zionists hadn't heartily endorsed it, providing zionists with the much-desired opportunity to destroy Iraq and murder millions by falsely claiming Saddam was a menace.
Germany declared war on USA in December 1941.
I must stress again that you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.
Posted by Walter E. Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 2, 2008 at 3:29 pm
When you are doing well with assassins you need no army.
The United Nations attacked Iraq in 91. After the surrender, Iraq was no longer a sovereign nation, but a conditional treaty state. Iraq violated those conditions and thus repudiated the cease fire agreement. I suncerely hope Dr. Froggy does not teach international law, history or any other subject requiring intellectual honesty. Perhaps Islamic women's studies? AKA Babes in Burkhas.