Bush Plans To Double Troops In Iraq, Destabilize Iran
US Liberals Guide Deborah White found the report and says that she is "at a loss for words to adequately convey the abject moral wrongness of the Iraq War in mid-2007."
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, let me remind you of last year's Iraq Study Group report (page 30, emphasis added):
Sustained increases in U.S. troop levels would not solve the fundamental cause of violence in Iraq, which is the absence of national reconciliation. A senior American general told us that adding U.S. troops might temporarily help limit violence in a highly localized area. However, past experience indicates that the violence would simply rekindle as soon as U.S. forces are moved to another area. As another American general told us, if the Iraqi government does not make political progress, all the troops in the world will not provide security. Meanwhile, Americas military capacity is stretched thin: we do not have the troops or equipment to make a substantial, sustained increase in our troop presence. Increased deployments to Iraq would also necessarily hamper our ability to provide adequate resources for our efforts in Afghanistan or respond to crises around the world.
And then there's The Blotter, which reports that "the CIA has received secret presidential approval to mount a covert 'black' operation to destabilize the Iranian government." This seems a dangerous game of chicken, as The Age is reporting that "Tehran has increased the number of its intelligence agents across Europe" and may be "target[ing] Europe's nuclear energy plants."
In case you've forgotten, in the 80s we sold arms to Iran in a weapons-for-hostages deal that came to be known as the Iran-Contra affair.
Related: US Continiuty of Government Plan
Other reading:
- Brian Ross, ABC News Undermine Non-Military Plan Against Iran - Confederate Yankee
- Cave In? Or Smart Politics? - The London Guardian
- A Collapse For Democrats - Sen. Feingold
- Democrats drop troop-pullout timetable - USA Today
- Democrats relent on pullout timetable - MSNBC
- Did Congress Authorize Either of These Actions? - Gun Toting Liberal
- More Treason From The Media - Iowa Voice
- Well, This Takes All The Fun Out Of It - Captain's Quarters
Comments
Entering into an act of war with Iran would further complicate the scenario not only in the middle east but worldwide. I believe the best solution can be reached through mutual respect and direct face to face dialogue with Iran. USA & Iran need to eliminate illwishes and mistrust towards each other originated by the overthrown of Dr. Mossadegh by the CIA back in the 1950īs (Dr. Mossadegh was a domecratically elected Iranian president, who nationalized the Iranian oil and kicked the british out of Persia).
Itīs amazing to watch nations going into war while knowing millions are dying of disease and malnutrition.
Letīs give the peace a chance
Thanks for your comment, Reza. Yes, the $$ to be spent on the current war could be invested at home — infrastructure, poverty, health care. And of course, it’s all borrowed money.
The US does not have the troop strength - or it appears supplies etc - to start another war.
KATHY: GREAT LITTLE ARTICLE on Iraq and Bush. ARE YOU ABLE TO WRITE 700 WORDS ON YOUR CHOICE OF SUBJECTS SO WE COULD PUBLISH IT IN THE SANTA FE SUN NEWS, CIRC. 10,000, IN NORTHERN N.M.; it is published every TWO WEEKS? DEADLINE ABOUT TEN DAYS FROM TODAY, OR ABOUT MAY 4? IF SO PLEASE REPLY TO ME….FINALLY, RICHARDSON ON IRAQ IS A VERY INTERESTING SUBJECT, DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO BUSH’S NON=POLICY, SO DRIVEN BY CORPORATE PLUTOCRACIES LIKE HALLIBURTON, AS IT IS…YOU MIGHT LOOK INTO IT AND WRITE ABOUT IT FOR MANY DIFFERENT PUBLICATIONS. I FIND RICHARDSON’S INTERNATIONAL VIEW EXHILLARATING AND REFRESHING, THE ONLY REAL SUBSTANCE AMONG THE DEMO. CANDIDATES.
STEPHEN FOX
(stephen@santafefineart.com)