Now that not fair! 
YeahâŚI think that one left a mark⌠:grrr:
This just in:
[quote]LONDON, England (Reuters) â Three former senior U.S. military officials warn that any military action against Iran would have âdisastrous consequencesâ and urged Washington to hold immediate and unconditional talks with Tehran.
The Bush administration has increased the regularity and vehemence of its accusations against Iran, prompting speculation it could be laying the ground for military attack against the Islamic state.
Washington has also sent a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf, a move seen as a warning to Iran, which the United States accuses of seeking atomic arms and fueling instability in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East. Iran denies the charges.
[b]In a letter to Londonâs Sunday Times newspaper, the three former U.S. military leaders said attacking Iran âwould have disastrous consequences for security in the region, coalition forces in Iraq and would further exacerbate regional and global tensions,â they wrote.
âThe current crisis must be resolved through diplomacy,â they said.[/b]
The letter was signed by retired Army Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, a former military assistant to Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, retired U.S. Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Hoar, a former commander in chief of U.S. Central Command; and retired Navy Vice Adm. Jack Shanahan, a former director of the Center for Defense Information.
[b]They urged the U.S. government to "engage immediately in direct talks with the government of Iran without preconditions.
âThere is time available to talk, we must ensure that we use it,â they said.[/b]
The three men have joined previous petitions calling on the Bush administration to change course in its policy on Iran.
Washington broke ties with Iran in 1980. It has offered to hold direct talks with Iran but only once Tehran halts its drive to produce nuclear fuel through uranium enrichment.
Iran, which says it wants to enrich uranium to make nuclear reactor fuel, not bombs, has refused.
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Friday said Washington was not planning for war with Iran, but again accused Tehran of supplying bombs for deadly attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq.[/quote]
I wonder what these generals think diplomacy is going to accomplish. What could we possibly give Iran that wouldnât compromise our principles? I think our experience with North Korea shows that appeasement will not prevent a country from developing nuclear weapons. And our experience with Germany proves appeasement doesnât work with a totalitarian society with ambitions to dominate the region. I donât understand the generalsâ thinking here.
Ever thinkg those exsenior guys STILL work for the govment? This IS diplomacy too.
:roflmao:
Iâm sorry. I canât help it.
:roflmao:
Iâm sorry. I canât help it.
[/quote]
A former âRemington Raiderâ?
(look it up)
He who laughs last, laughs best:
"How predictions for Iraq came true
By John Simpson
BBC World Affairs Editor
It was a few weeks before the invasion of Iraq, three years ago. I was interviewing the Saudi Foreign Minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, in the ballroom of a big hotel in Cairo.
Shrewd, amusing, bulky in his superb white robes, he described to me all the disasters he was certain would follow the invasion.
The US and British troops would be bogged down in Iraq for years. There would be civil war between Sunnis and Shias. The real beneficiary would be the government in Iran.
âAnd what do the Americans say when you tell them this,â I asked? âThey donât even listen,â he said. . . . "
They probably laughed then, too.
Keeping in mind that this story is from a British paper, unamed sources and all that. Still, it hopefully will spark a career change or two.
[quote]Iranian nuclear scientist âassassinated by Mossadâ
Sarah Baxter, Washington
The Sunday Times, February 04, 2007
A PRIZE-WINNING Iranian nuclear scientist has died in mysterious circumstances, according to Radio Farda, which is funded by the US State Department and broadcasts to Iran.
An intelligence source suggested that Ardeshire Hassanpour, 44, a nuclear physicist, had been assassinated by Mossad, the Israeli security service.
Hassanpour worked at a plant in Isfahan where uranium hexafluoride gas is produced. The gas is needed to enrich uranium in another plant at Natanz which has become the focus of concerns that Iran may be developing nuclear weapons.
According to Radio Farda, Iranian reports of Hassanpourâs death emerged on January 21 after a delay of six days, giving the cause as âgas poisoningâ. The Iranian reports did not say how or where Hassanpour was poisoned but his death was said to have been announced at a conference on nuclear safety.
Rheva Bhalla of Stratfor, the US intelligence company, claimed on Friday that Hassanpour had been targeted by Mossad and that there was âvery strong intelligenceâ to suggest that he had been assassinated by the Israelis, who have repeatedly threatened to prevent Iran acquiring the bomb.
Hassanpour won Iranâs leading military research prize in 2004 and was awarded top prize at the Kharazmi international science festival in Iran last year.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is expected to announce next Sunday â the 28th anniversary of the Islamic revolution â that 3,000 centrifuges have been installed at Natanz, enabling Iran to move closer to industrial scale uranium enrichment.
Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency say that hundreds of technicians and labourers have been âworking feverishlyâ to assemble equipment at the plant.
timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ⌠67,00.html[/quote]
A bit more from the Sunday dailies-
[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/04/wiran04.xml]US military chiefs eye confrontation with Iran
By Philip Sherwell in Washington, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 12:51am GMT 04/02/2007
Americaâs military chiefs are at loggerheads with the countryâs diplomats and spies over tactics for confronting Iranian agents in Iraq over their role in lethal attacks on US forces.(more of article at link)[/url]
[quote=âspookâ]He who laughs last, last best:
"How predictions for Iraq came true
By John Simpson
BBC World Affairs Editor[/quote]
Nice article, spook.
One of the most telling quotes:
[quote]Another psychiatrist told me that in the days of Saddam Hussein, his patients had shown the effects of living under a ferocious dictatorship: stress levels were very high.
Now, he said, most of his patients suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. Itâs no longer the fear of violence and injury which troubles them, itâs the daily reality of it. [/quote]
Oh good. WE have someone whose predictions ACTUALLY came true?
Remember the sandstorm which was supposed to bog us down, the quagmire that we were stuck in three days into the invasion, the Stalingrad that would be the battle for Baghdad, the chemical weapons (?!!!) that would be used against us? the bioagents (?!!!) that would be used against us? the chemical and/or bio weapons that would be lobbed against Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Israel? The museum that was looted beyond anything the Mongols had done, the huge refugee flows that were supposed to occur with the invasion? the burning of the oil fields, the entry of Turkey and/or Iran into Iraq to stake out a claim, the collapse of the economy? etc. etc. etc. Yes, we have seen all these claims before.
Now, how many were claiming that three elections would be held, that power would be transferred, that a constitution would be signed/ratified, that for all the violence around Baghdad, the vast part of the country is relatively stable/quiet, that despite all the incitement, that the vast majority of Sunnis and Shias still do not want to kill each other, though the deaths squads have been very active, that al Qaeda would find rocky ground for its message and ultimately be sidelined, that the Baathists that wanted to return to power would have been sidelined (ironically by Shia death squads) and that this may force a realistic assessment of their true demographic stature in the nation. Most now accept that they make up 15 percent of the population (or less given that mostly Sunnis have fled the nation) and because of this a realistic bargain can perhaps be arrived at?
130 or so people were killed by another car bomb this weekend. If bombing Iran stops these militant/insurgent idiots from getting money and arms and takes away their ability to slaughter their own people, fine by me.
Ditto for Palestine, Lebanon, Afghanistan⌠all areas where the Iranian government funds a great deal of terrorism and âsectarianâ strife. Even in Iraq, this has more to do with gang turf wars than actual religious violence in my view. Reminds of Moscow after the fall of communism. Unfortunately, democracy and greater civic mindedness was not the end result there either. But at least it is âstableâ once again. That should reassure those whose primary goal is âpeace.â Oh for a post mallâŚ
Unlike your own. You said Iraq would be sorted out in two years
You mean almost 4 years after the invasion.
Yes Depleted Uranium, but you arenât exactly âusâ. Itâs the troops who are âdumb stupid animalsâ to quote one of your darlings Kissinger who are âusâ.
All those troops have so much to look forward to with cancers and illness. Doug Rokke would vouch for that.
Yeah the lies from your flavors of the month told us shite like London was 45 mins from being attacked with chem/bio weapons. Where is this dirty bomb Conthemedia Rice talked about?
Iraq is emerging as one of the fastest-growing refugee crises in the world (to quote the washington post) which occurred as a result of the invasion
A puppet regime that no-one takes seriously.
Of course most of the country is desert. But that is irrelevant.
That is common sense - the majority of the world donât want wars or occupiers. Never have and never will. Only people such as yourself who donât fight wars support them.
Who exactly are âAl Qaedaâ or âThe Baseâ?
Are they listed on the stock exchange?
Has anyone ever spoke publicly calling themselves âAl Qaedaâ? And I donât mean some CIA set up website who claim responsibility when anything from a stink bomb to a fake Osama audio tape is released.
The mainstream media make out they are an like the terrorist CIA or something. Oh wait the CIA are terrorists.
The Goal is Balkanization which you once claimed was a âleftistâ conspiracy. It is supported by the CFR (2003) and Israelis (early 1980s). Thus, chaos and war is good for profits, and for the end goal.
And it makes sure another once strong arab country is weak for the Israelis.
Donât worry Bush is fucking it up for now, the next president (Hilary - who you admitted you admire) will promise to âclean things upâ - and the people will fall for the rhetoric and believe the things Bush stood for arenât the same things the new president stands for.
The aganda will continue with the clean up and the same profits will be made for the same people propping up the current puppet in DC.
Umm, exactly how does bombing Iran stop Sunni insurgents from blowing up Shiites? The reason that the Sunnis are killing the Shiites is that they claim the Shiites are turning Iraq over to the Iranians. The Sunni insurgency money is coming from Saudi Arabians and other extreme Salafists, as well as being internally generated by extortions and kidnappings. They would be delighted to see Iran getting bombed.
Hillary in 2008! Sheâll nuke Iran in 2009.
ahh, the FS bot, once again taunting us with your pseudo-logic, your half-truths, your twisting of our words. So tempting for us to respond, and we do, but like some victimized woman going back to her abusive husband, we know deep inside you will never change. Once more into the frayâŚ
If only you wouldnât make me angry, I wouldnât have to beat you JB. Donât you understand? Now, did you have a point? That Iran is not really a threat? problem? What?
Everything is moving into place for a massive U.S./Israeli air assault on Iran in the second quarter of this year (Apr-May-June) so thatâs my vote for the next chapter in the saga of Operation Jackass.
Not for sure, but I would be thrilled if that time line was accurate.