Friday, August 10, 2007

Cheney Urges Strike On Iran

From McClatchy, by Warren P. Strobel, John Walcott and Nancy A. Youssef:

WASHINGTON — President Bush charged Thursday that Iran continues to arm and train insurgents who are killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and he threatened action if that continues.

Behind the scenes, however, the president's top aides have been engaged in an intensive internal debate over how to respond to Iran's support for Shiite Muslim groups in Iraq and its nuclear program. Vice President Dick Cheney several weeks ago proposed launching airstrikes at suspected training camps in Iran run by the Quds force, a special unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to two U.S. officials who are involved in Iran policy.

The debate has been accompanied by a growing drumbeat of allegations about Iranian meddling in Iraq from U.S. military officers, administration officials and administration allies outside government and in the news media. It isn't clear whether the media campaign is intended to build support for limited military action against Iran, to pressure the Iranians to curb their support for Shiite groups in Iraq or both.

Nor is it clear from the evidence the administration has presented whether Iran, which has long-standing ties to several Iraqi Shiite groups, including the Mahdi Army of radical cleric Muqtada al Sadr and the Badr Organization, which is allied with the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki, is a major cause of the anti-American and sectarian violence in Iraq or merely one of many. At other times, administration officials have blamed the Sunni Muslim group al Qaida in Iraq for much of the violence.

I give McKlatchy immense credit for airing the voices of dissent to the maladministration's finger-pointing at Iran. The Bush maladministration continues to give out misinformation concerning the extent that the leadership in Iran gives help to the insurgents. But they continue to support Prime Minister Maliki, who is Shiite. The Iranian leadership is Shiite. What can Bush and Cheney be thinking? They have enabled the strengthening of the relationship between the leadership of Iraq and Iran, by not pressuring Maliki to give the Sunnis a greater stake in the future of Iraq.

I hope that the members of Congress, now in recess, are keeping a sharp eye on this situation.

Juan Cole at Informed Comment has this to say:

In other words, the US military is playing a dangerous political game of attempting to undermine al-Maliki's diplomacy with Iran and to alienate the Sadr Movement from him altogether (it has already suspended membership in his government). For more on the timing of (surely overstated) US military announcements implicating Iran so as to undermine talks with Tehran by US and Iraqi diplomats, see Bill Beeman's comments below. This is not the proper role for generals, and it is shocking that Amassador Ryan Crocker and Secretary of State Condi Rice allow it to go on.

I can't seem to link directly to Cole's post on Wednesday, so if you want to read the quote at his site, you must scroll down from today's post to the Wednesday, Aug. 8, 2007, post.

Before the invasion of Iraq, we were fed the Bush maladministration's deceptive and inaccurate line on Iraq, and now they are doing the same thing with Iran. It is vital that we pay better attention to the dissenting voices this time around.


  1. Remember the naughty joke I posted a last week?

    Have you seen the mess that Missy is in? Seems that she's moving into a shelter (her and five kids)to get away from an abusive husband. If you've not already done something and if you've got a few spare minutes, I suspect that hearing from you might be a comfort. Check Fr. Hagger's blog (top story) first b'cause it clearly is a bad situation and a little background will help.

  2. Lapin, I've already responded at MadPriest's place. He said not to respond at her blog at this time.

    That's a terrible situation, but she and her children are safe for now. Thanks be to God.

  3. I only just saw your earlier post over there, or I wouldn't have put this up here, but MP has posted since then with a question for you. Why don't you check it out.

    My transposing of letters has escalated this past couple of weeks (the ones above noticed have been corrected, so no need to go looking). Hope it's not the first sign!

  4. Back to the topic at hand.

    There is no army to send to Iran unless we draft and train in a hurry. That isn't an all bad idea as long as the first people who are drafted and deployed are all the members and relatives of Congress and the Administration.

    Praying God finds a way to convince Cheney and the other warmongers that they will die if they do this.

    Shudder. I fear the administration and pseudoChristians more than the Muslims.

  5. I don't know where to even begin with this. Let's see, bombing raids in Cambodia and North Vietnam, the Iran - Iraq war for starters. With Cheney it doesn't even seem to be arrogance or the willful kind of ignorance that often goes with it -- it's as if he is deliberately trying to create as much havoc as possible so that none of the parties can ever achieve any kind of stability, let alone peace. I just can't tell if it's out of sheer malevolence or whether he really believes that if we get the Sunni and Shiites at each others throats, both within Iraq and between Iran and Iraq, then everyone else (or at least the U.S. or at least his economic interests?) will be better off as a result. What kind of madness is this?

  6. We have no army to send, but I'm afraid what they have in mind is a bombing campaign, which will not accomplish their goals - whatever their goals are. These folks are the ultimate incompetents.

  7. I think your suspicion is well-founded, Mimi; it's hard to imagine any strategic move more detrimental to the true interests of the United States, as you also point out.

    If we all get through this administration's evil folly still able to do such things, I think it would be a good idea to consider changing our system to make the Executive more accountable. This Imperial nonsense does too much damage to the world.

  8. Johnieb, once a president has the power to do something, no matter who the person is, Democrat or Republican, s/he is not likely to voluntarily give that power away. It will have to be wrenched away by the Congress under pressure by the citizens of the US.

  9. I agree ... and we need to be about wrenching it away, I say!

  10. That this could be even be contemplated, given the quagmire the US has churned up in Iraq, the uncertain situation in Afghanistan and the fact that the US lacks the troops to handle the situations in which it is already involved, is horrifying.

    Just keep repeating - "The difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that Cheney and Bush had a plan to get out of Vietnam".

  11. I hope that somebody is recording all of this craziness for the glorious day when Mr Cheney gets pulled in before a court for crimes against humanity.

  12. I'm sorry. I just don't know what to say. I'm speechless. If we believe this one more time...

  13. My message to the mainstream media is:

    Listen to the dissenting voices! Don't repeat the mistakes you made during the run-up to the war in Iraq. Put them on the front page. Let them speak and air their views on your so-called news shows. By now you should know that just because the Bush maladministration says it doesn't make it true.

    For crying out loud, people, do your jobs!

  14. Misinformation or malinformation?

  15. Kate, malinformation is good.

    Let's see. We have the Bush maladministration handing out malinformation, and we have Gonzales running the Dept. of Injustice, thanks to St. Pat. We gettin' there.


Anonymous commenters, please sign a name, any name, to distinguish one anonymous commenter from another. Thank you.