Who Wants This War?

Well unless you hide during the day under a rock then you are aware of how close the US and Iran maybe to a war……personally, I do ot think it is a good idea but then I am an antiwar person and cannot see too many wars as a good thing.

But ask yourself….just who is it that wants this war?

Trump and the Secstate and NatSec adviser do not seem to be on the same page….so who wants this?

Speaking on state TV of the prospect of a war in the Gulf, Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei seemed to dismiss the idea.

“There won’t be any war. …We don’t seek a war, and [the Americans] don’t either. They know it’s not in their interests.”

The ayatollah’s analysis is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for Iran.

Iran’s hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Airfields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.

 
But not to worry….the Speaker of the House said that the Congress have not voted for war….

The Trump administration does not have congressional authorization to go to war against Iran, the Democratic leader of the U.S. House of Representatives warned on Thursday amid escalating tensions in the region.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters that she backed what appeared to be U.S. President Donald Trump’s aversion to actual military conflict with Tehran.

“I like what I hear from the president — that he has no appetite on this,” she said. The Washington Post, citing several unnamed U.S. officials, reported late Wednesday that Trump was frustrated that his advisers may be rushing into war and that he preferred a more diplomatic approach and direct talks with Iran.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-iran-congress/u-s-house-speaker-congress-has-not-approved-war-against-iran-idUKKCN1SM1WA

Really?  The Congress has not thought it important enough to vote on any war since the invasion of Afghanistan….so what makes me think they will have any say whatsoever in whether we go to war with Iran or not?

Besides they, the Congress, cannot stop a war any way….look at the failure with the Yemen conflict….the Congress has become a toothless tiger.

Advertisements

Neocons Chest Thumping

The news these days is how close the US is coming to a shooting war with Iran…..but it is not the first time in recent history……

https://lobotero.com/2006/12/27/how-will-an-iranian-war-begin/

https://lobotero.com/2015/04/16/a-really-bad-idea-a-limited-war-with-iran-the-national-interest/

Keep in mind that the architect of the 2003 invasion of Iraq on false information was John Bolton, among others…..and now he is in a position that gives him more influence than in 2003……

All I can say is…here we go again!

An Iraq-War redux is now in full play, with leading roles played by some of the same protagonists – President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton, for example, who says he still thinks attacking Iraq was a good idea. Co-starring is Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The New York Times on Tuesday played its accustomed role in stoking the fires, front-paging a report that, at Bolton’s request, Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan has come up with an updated plan to send as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East, should Iran attack American forces or accelerate work on nuclear weapons. The Times headline writer, at least, thought it appropriate to point to echoes from the past: “White House Reviews Military Plans Against Iran, in Echoes of Iraq War.”

Pretexts for an Attack on Iran

John Bolton is in “Wonderland” at this time……

John Bolton has a Haig-sized ego. (one must be an old fart to appreciate the Haig reference) He aspires to control the ebb and flow of foreign policy in the Trump administration. He is often at odds with his colleagues from the State Department and Pentagon. And he is dealing with a president who, if not asleep much of the time, is only intermittently focused on national security issues.

Recently, Bolton too seemed to have his “I’m in control here” moment. With the conflict intensifying in Venezuela, the national security advisor leaked the opposition plan for the army to defect en masse from the Maduro government in favor of challenger Juan Guiado. Bolton’s tweets reportedly angered President Trump, who felt “boxed into a corner,” particularly after the defections didn’t materialize and Nicolas Maduro did not flee the country.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/05/16/bolton-in-wonderland/

Time for all parties to step back and think what they are doing. Once the “brink” has been breached then coming back becomes much more difficult.

Perhaps these actions are a prelude to negotiations: the U.S. is exerting “maximum pressure”, it says, to bring a more compliant Iran back to the table; in like manner, should Tehran conclude that it has no choice but to reach a new deal with Washington in order to relieve unsustainable economic strain, it will want to enter such talks with a stronger hand. Resuming its nuclear activities, making its presence felt in the region, and disrupting Saudi or Emirati oil exports could all be ways of enhancing its bargaining power. But if these manoeuvres are a diplomatic game, it is a dangerous one: either side could misinterpret the other’s intentions. Any Iranian move could easily lead to U.S. and/or Israeli strikes which, in turn, could lead to an Iranian counter-response. Or vice versa. Escalation comes easily; de-escalation is a much taller order, especially in the absence of direct channels of communication that can pre-empt misunderstandings or miscalculations.

 
This could become a major war since we have a president that sows chaos in his wake….this needs a steady hand and commonsense to prevent this from exploding.
 
But until then….the Neocons in Trumpland are trying to sell this as a “Just War”…….a Just War?
 
Just war theory deals with the justification of how and why wars are fought. The justification can be either theoretical or historical. The theoretical aspect is concerned with ethically justifying war and the forms that warfare may or may not take. The historical aspect, or the “just war tradition,” deals with the historical body of rules or agreements that have applied in various wars across the ages. For instance, international agreements such as the Geneva and Hague conventions are historical rules aimed at limiting certain kinds of warfare which lawyers may refer to in prosecuting transgressors, but it is the role of ethics to examine these institutional agreements for their philosophical coherence as well as to inquire into whether aspects of the conventions ought to be changed.
 
To me a Just War is a silly notion that only applies in a very limited reasons…..
 
And then we have those that a “Preventive War” is the only answer…..to that I say Bullshit!
 
The Neocons are working overtime to find a justification for a war……most are based on LIES and propaganda……PERIOD!

On The Road To War!

It seems that the advisers to the president are determined to get into a shooting war with Iran…..personally I do not think any of these accusations are true (that means they are LIES)…..apparently I am not alone…..

The narrative of an “increased threat” posed by Iran and its proxies across the Middle East is being used to justify a US military buildup and a general escalation of tensions in the area. British Maj. Gen. Chris Ghika, however, has raised serious doubts about that.

Maj. Gen. Ghika said that there has been “no increased threat from Iranian-backed forces,” despite the claims from US officials, mostly Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and John Bolton. Perhaps more damningly, Ghika says he does not believe there is any daylight between Britain’s assessment of “no increased threat” and the assessment from US intelligence.

In other words, the US officials are lying about the intelligence, presumably to justify the growing US buildup and to keep hyping the possibility of a war with Iran. US Central Command, however, angrily shot back contradicting Ghika, insisting his statement runs counter to established US position on the matter.

CENTCOM’s statement is not exactly a refutation of Ghika’s position on UK and US intelligence. Rather, it refers to “identified credible threats” but provides no indication where they came from. It clearly wasn’t intelligence agencies, because the threats were only made available to intelligence agencies after their identification.

Early reports on the “Iranian proxies” allegation suggested it came out of Israel, and that it was built around Israeli officials believing it would make sense for Iran to do that sort of thing to attack the US. This could suggest it was never verified by US or UK intelligence, and was rather just accepted as the official version because it fit with US policy at the time.

(antiwar.com)

US is fanning those flames vigorously…..(do not believe all the denials)…..these neocons want war……

The Sunday “sabotage” on oil tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates warrants a “thorough investigation,” according to US Ambassador to Saudi Arabia John Abizaid, who told reporters that he wants responses “short of war” to be taken.

Other officials indicated on Monday that they consider Iran the main suspect of the attack, though they have conceded that they don’t have any real evidence of this, let alone proof. Abizaid said starting a war over it would not be in the interest of Iran, the US, or Saudi Arabia.

Which is a potentially controversial position for the ambassador to take, given the ongoing US military buildup in the Middle East, centered around the idea of a war with Iran. Even if he believes this isn’t in America’s interest, nor justified on unproven allegations of sabotage, it seems to be the general direction the US is headed anyhow.

In particular, the idea of having a thorough investigation before the reaction is not the way the US has done things in recent years. At a time when hawks are lining up to call for action against Iran on any pretext, it is vital to hear the call to let cooler heads prevail.

(antiwar.com)

Filter out all the warmongering BS and think about one thing……this article was published in The American Conservative……

David French defends one of the great crimes of the 21st century:

Today is the 16th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and Twitter is alive with condemnations of the conflict — countered by precious few defenses. Yet I believed the Iraq War was just and proper in 2003, and I still believe that today.

There is good reason that the Iraq war has “precious few defenders.” The Iraq war was a great crime and a massive blunder. Not only was it illegal under international law, but it was undeniably unjust according to any fair reading of just war theory. Our government did not have just cause to invade Iraq and overthrow its government. Preventive war can never be justified, because it can never be just to strike first against another country because you fear what their government might one day do to you. That is simply aggression committed out of irrational fear. To say that you still think 16 years later that invading Iraq is “just and proper” is to admit that you don’t know what those words mean.

Preventive War Is Always Unjust

The “Just War Theory”? 

A confusing thing but as usual I can help……Just war theory deals with the justification of how and why wars are fought. The justification can be either theoretical or historical.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/justwar/

In this world today, the 21st century in case there is any confusion) war does not make sense….the only people to gain are those that make the weapons of destruction.

We Americans have allowed too many wars in our name…..all the deaths are in our name…..and what does anyone gain?

****Breaking News******

News came out after I had written this draft for post today……

The US Embassy in Iraq says the State Department has ordered all non-essential, non-emergency government staff to leave the country right away amid escalating tensions with Iran. The security alert, published on the embassy’s website on Wednesday, comes after Washington last week said it had detected new and urgent threats from Iran and its proxy forces in the region targeting Americans and American interests. On Sunday, the embassy advised Americans to avoid travel to Iraq, citing “heightened tensions.”

And the world waits!

It’s Lies Once Again!

The terrifying news came out over the weekend that the US was moving a Naval Strike group is moving into the region on some vague reason…..that reason has been speculated that it is a warning to Iran. For so a warning for what?

Once again the US will take Israel’s word for it….it is not like their intel has been ever wrong….(sarcasm)…..

A US buildup of military forces in the Middle East, and threats to use force against Iran are now being justified by US officials who claim to have “clear indications” that Iran was plotting to attack US forces in the area, in Iraq according to some reports.

Exactly what these “clear indications” actually were is unclear. Israeli media, however, gave credit to Israeli intelligence, saying they’d passed on their own report of a “possible Iran plot,” and the White House went from there.

This intelligence doesn’t seem great, as officials say that Mossad was unclear what Iran was actually planning to do, but that tensions are on the rise, and there were several scenarios that Mossad came up with that might happen.

Israel is always keen to drum up tensions between the US and Iran at any rate, so they probably didn’t need a lot of confidence to pass it along to the US and hope something came of it.

Iran, by contrast, accused the US of “talking up” the threat as a justification for a buildup that the US Navy had scheduled some time ago. The Navy has already scheduled the aircraft carrier deployment nearly a month ago.

(antiwar.com)

This is just the sort of LIES that gets our asses in trouble over and over again.

We trusted the Israeli intel in Lebanon in the 1980s and we kill about 100 innocent people trying to kill one person and again in the 80s when we trusted their intel and we missed Qaddafi and finally the intel from Israel has been wrong about Iranian nukes for 25 years….and now we are trusting their inept intel once again…..

What do we pay the CIA to do?

Maybe confirm the intel before we do something stupid like Iraq.

Just a thought.

It Is Not Regime Change

Is this post about Venezuela? Nope it is Iran that is in process of a plan for regime change.

When the United States considered labeling the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization in 2017, then Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security advisor H.R. McMaster were still with the Trump White House. In their places now are Iran hawks Mike Pompeo and John Bolton. The White House’s national security team is, therefore, more heavily in favor of taking a more aggressive stance toward the Islamic republic. With the resignation of Defense Secretary James Mattis, no influential voices remain to back a moderate course of action. Neither the Pentagon nor the CIA support applying the terrorism label to the IRGC, but their sway is less than it once was. There is now a higher probability that the United States will follow through with the designation. If the State Department does indeed label the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organization, it would mark the first time in U.S. history that it would have singled out a branch of a foreign military for such treatment.

On the question of targeting Iranian allies, the United States could designate several Iran-trained militias operating as part of Iraq’s security architecture as terrorist groups under one of several laws. But the consequences of doing so could be high. Although those designations could fall short of provoking Iran to target U.S. personnel in the region, such a decision would stoke anti-U.S. sentiment in Iraq, where these groups have become more entrenched in recent years, and could inspire Iranian-backed popular mobilization units or other groups to lash out at U.S. military, diplomatic and economic targets in Iraq. It would also strengthen the push from Iran-allied politicians in the Iraqi parliament to amend or revoke Iraq’s agreement with the United States to maintain troops in the country. Enforcing such a designation would create a complex problem of monitoring compliance for U.S. and other Western companies given that many of the Iranian-backed militias also have political wings. Earlier this month, the United States designated the Iranian-trained Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba militia in Iraq a terrorist group in what could mark the initial phase of this strategy.

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2019/03/27/the_key_to_countering_iran_114288.html

Sanctions are designed to force a solution out of Iran……a solution that could lead to a shooting conflict…….

Diplomacy is out of the question with the Trumpites……these war hawks will not be happy until the bullets fly……

Can Trump hold back these rebel rousers?

Speaking on Wednesday at The Asia Society, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif says that he does not believe that President Trump wants a war in Iran, citing Trump’s promise “not to waste another $7 trillion” in the Middle East.

That said, Zarif said he believes that Trump aims to ‘bring us to our knees to talk,” while contrasting him with John Bolton and his “B team” who are angling for “regime change at the very least” in Iran.

Zarif linked Bolton to the Saudi crown prince, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and the Abu Dhabi crown prince, saying they are all looking for a pretext to convince Trump to take “crazy and adventurous” actions.

Zarif said this didn’t amount to a crisis yet, but that it was making the situation very dangerous, and that accidents could have unforeseen consequences for both sides.

(antiwar.com)

Bolton has wanted a war with Iran for 25 years…..and now he has a president’s ear….a president that is for all purposes ignorant on the situation…….

Who will win this tug of war?

Was War Declared?

While everybody was being told that there was no collusion and the exoneration of a president…..the US moved a little closer to a possible war with Iran.

In the first such move of its kind, President Trump has labeled Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Never before has the US made that declaration about a foreign military, reports Reuters. In fact, never before has the US used the label against any part of a foreign government, notes the New York Times. In response, Iran is expected to label the American military a terrorist organization, too, reports NPR. “This unprecedented step, led by the Department of State, recognizes the reality that Iran is not only a State Sponsor of Terrorism, but that the IRGC actively participates in, finances, and promotes terrorism as a tool of statecraft,” Trump said in a statement.

“If you are doing business with the IRGC, you will be bankrolling terrorism,” Trump said. The IRGC has about 150,000 members, including ground forces, navy, and air force personnel, reports the BBC. The move will allow the US to seek penalties against members of the group and bar their entrance to America. The same applies to individuals or entities providing assistance to the Guard. The Washington Post notes that the move comes one day before Benjamin Netanyahu, a staunch ally of Trump who has made Iran a focal point of his tenure, seeks re-election as prime minister of Israel

Let me help to catch you up…….

https://lobotero.com/2019/04/08/stir-the-pot-for-war/

https://lobotero.com/2019/04/08/stir-the-pot-for-war/

Now what about this war thingy?

It is no longer a question of if Americans will die in a conflict with Iran, but when.

The United States has long been engaged in a secret shadow war with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), dating back to the American invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003.

This conflict took the lives of hundreds of American troops and hundreds more IRGC members. The Iranian opposition to the U.S. occupation of Iraq, and the inability of the U.S. to militarily defeat Iranian forces inside Iraq, was just one reason that the Obama administration decided to withdraw American troops in 2011.

 
This is just an attempt to protect Israel…..for most Americans cannot remember what happened in 1979….all they know is that Iran wants to destroy Israel and that is enough to possibly go to war.

Stir The Pot For War

The US foreign policy pundits have done all they can to stir the pot in the past……for Iraq, for Syria and those are just the most recent.

These people have lied to the American people in an attempt to get them to support their adventurism and intervention and their silly regime change fantasies.

Well nothing is new…the Trump Pentagon is set about lyimng to make an armed strike against Iran tolerable.

How are they doing this?

When the Pentagon starts throwing around estimates of who got killed and how in its assorted wars in the Middle East, they are often wildly inaccurate. Nowhere was this more apparent than a new briefing this week on estimates in the 2003-2011 Iraq War.

Designed for Special Envoy Brian Hook to give hawkish speeches on Iran, the briefing estimated that Iran was “responsible” for the deaths of 608 US troops during the Iraq War. This was an upward revision from a 2015 estimate of 500, and seemingly was only done to allow Hook to bring it up now.

A more accurate estimate would, of course, be zero deaths. Despite years of anti-Iran rhetoric, the US has never conclusively pinned a single death on the Iranian government or its forces. Rather, these deaths are all loosely attributable to Iraqi Shi’ite factions.

That anyone Shi’ite is necessarily under Iranian command is a popular conceit for US officials, and in Iraq, where 60 percent of the population is Shi’ite, there are no shortage of Shi’ites to blame, particularly militias that didn’t support the US occupation of Iraq.

Some of these groups had ideological ties to Iran, though other substantial factions, like the Mehdi Army, were nationalist groups that opposed both US and Iranian interference in Iraqi affairs. It is convenient for the US to blame Iran, however, so that’s what they’re doing.

Trying to make all Shi’ites equal Iran has continued beyond the Iraq War. In Syria, the US has routinely threatened Shi’ite militias for being “Iranian fighters,” and the entire justification for US meddling in the Yemen War is that the Shi’ite Houthi movement, whose form of Shi’a Islam is distinct from the one in Iran, must be in league with Iran.

This is the usual lie and if ignored then we will be in conflict with yet another country because of a damn lie perpetrated only as a way to enhance the profits of the M-IC.

This accusation is a LIE!

But that is what they do……they do as they are told by the defense industry…after all that is why the pay Congress to do their bidding.

Now the ante is upped……

The Trump administration is preparing to designate Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a “foreign terrorist organization,” an unprecedented move against a national armed force that could have widespread implications for US personnel and policy in the Middle East and elsewhere, the AP reports. Officials informed of the step said an announcement was expected Monday, after a monthslong escalation in the administration’s rhetoric against Iran, its support for militia groups in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen, as well as anti-Israel groups in the region and beyond. It would be the first such designation by any American administration of an entire foreign government entity, although portions of the Guard, notably its elite Quds Force, have been targeted previously by the US.

Two US officials and a congressional aide confirmed the planned move. Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, seemed to anticipate the designation, saying in a tweet Sunday aimed at President Donald Trump that Trump “should know better than to be conned into another US disaster.” The designation, planning for which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal, comes with sanctions, including freezes on assets the Guard may have in US jurisdictions, and a ban on Americans doing business with it or providing material support for its activities. The designation could significantly complicate US military and diplomatic work, notably in Iraq, where many Shiite militias and Iraqi political parties have close ties to the Guard.

Just one brick in the wall……making a case for armed action…..and making the case for the US to involve itself in yet another war…..

When is enough enough with the American public?