NeoCon AEI Advance Iranian Influence Meme

A new report ("Iranian Influence in the Levant, Iraq, and Afghanistan") published by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) think-tank purports to show the reach and scope of Iranian influence across the Middle East...Co-written by AEI fellows Fred Kagan and Danielle Pletka, and Kagan's wife, Kimberly, who heads the Institute for the Study of War...

... it warns: "Much as America might desire to avoid war with Iran, continued Iranian interventions... might ultimately make that option less repulsive than the alternatives." The report relies entirely on open-source material, international and domestic media, non-governmental and government reports, as well as interviews conducted by Fred and Kimberly Kagan, who respectively visited Afghanistan and Iraq.

While President Bush may share AEI's view on Iranian malfeasance, his influence is waning. In a National Public Radio interview this month, Defence Secretary Bob Gates appeared to contradict his boss's view that Iran posed a "threat", instead saying that Tehran posed "significant challenges".

"When I think of a threat I think of a direct military threat, and while the jury's out in terms of whether they have eased up on their support to those opposing us in Iraq, I don't see the Iranians in the near term as a direct military threat," he said.

It seems the scholars at AEI have caught on, as they have attempted to shift the focus of the debate from Iranian motivations and intentions towards an "empirical study" of Iran's influence. In the final analysis, it reflects a tactical shift away from openly beating the war drums as do scholars like Ledeen, whose most recent book is entitled, "The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots' Quest for Destruction", and towards an attempt to highlight the extent of Iranian influence in the region. The conclusion to be drawn is that, even without the nuclear issue at the forefront, Iran continues to exert a negative impact on U.S. interests.

But perhaps the authors should do some fact-checking of their own. On page three, the incorrectly identify the former President of Syria as "Hafez al-Hassad," who died in 2006. Assad died in 2000.

Well they never were the brightest, or the most honest, or...ok they are just scumbags. Obviously angling for that sweet spot of the bipartisan imperial ego that cannot bear any power other than its own to dominate and the arrogant presumption that America has any business (interests)thousands of miles from 'der Homeland'. Give them enough time and they will cook up a report saying Iran causes restless leg syndrome & wrinkles. Keeps them wealthy and after all isn't that the most important function of war and 'think' tanks for the neocon organism?

The Tonkin Commemorative Geography Quiz

Ok people, now pay attention this won't be too difficult.

Q1. Now who knows where the strait of Hormuz is?

A: Anyone.... it's the narrow bit of water between Iran and the United Arab Emirates with a hint of Oman (see map)

Q2. How far away is this area of water from- a: Iran. b: the USA?

A: It is zero miles from Iran as it laps on the sandy shores of Persia, it is approximately 8,684 miles (as the crow flies) from the USA.

Q3. So which country's naval forces are simply mooching around off their own coast defending their nation from attack (with occasional hilarious -and very irresponsible, ahem- pranks such as this) and which are thousands of miles from home belligerently occupying the area?

Hint: Come on, it really isn't that hard, just go over the figures- 0 or 8,684 miles. Here let's make it easy we'll round down the large (extra hint) number to 8,000. So is 8,000 bigger...or smaller than 0?

A: Yes 8,000 is bigger than 0! It's the USA who are occupying an area thousands of miles from home. Well done!

Now I understand that might have been difficult because of the media reflecting elite Imperial opinion-

US Navy warships over the weekend came "very close" to shooting at an Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessels, which American officials say provoked US ships in international waters, according to CNN. "US officials are confirming to CNN that five Iranian Revolutionary guard boats, in their words, 'harassed and provoked' three US Navy warships sailing in the Strait of Hormuz," reports CNN's Barbara Starr. "One of those Iranian boats came within 200 yards of a Navy warship."

But that's what we have to do, unlearn the established nationalistic biases and see the world from eyes not tattooed in red, white and blue. (nb. this answer also applies to 'which side of the line were the British sailors on?' which was asked & debated by retards everywhere last year. They were thousands of miles over their line, m'kay?).

Projection

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Saturday he would use part of a weeklong Middle East trip next week to press allies to help keep Iran's "aggressive ambitions" in check. Bush will travel to Israel and the Palestinian West Bank as he tries to help the two sides reach a peace agreement. But he will focus on Iran when he visits five regional allies -- Kuwait, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

"I will discuss the importance of countering the aggressive ambitions of Iran," Bush said in his weekly radio address.

He has got some good writers, that is some deadpan ironic shit right there. 'Peace agreement' stop it you're killing me (which when applied to Palestinians I think is what he means by 'help'). Oh and also if you care to look at the human rights record of those allies mentioned, erm the term 'axis of evil' is not wholly inappropriate. Yet still this nonsense is presented with a straight face by the media without countervailing arguments or basic factual refutation of this moron's idiocy. This is going to be a long year.

NIE LIE

"Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005," says the unclassified summary of the secret report.Rand Beers, who resigned from Bush's National Security Council just before the Iraq war, said the report should derail any appetite for war on the administration's part, and should reinvigorate regional diplomacy. "The new NIE throws cold water on the efforts of those urging military confrontation with Iran," he said.

The spooks say Iran halted its nuclear weapon program in 2003, incidentally the year it proposed unconditional talks with the US and which the White house rejected point blank. They want war, ok, the Bush administration in the United States of America want war with Iran. So with this latest piece of reality impinging on their war pimping they spin it thusly- as they continue to enrich uranium (which they need for nuclear power) that means they actually are pursuing weapons. Lying war mongering bastard says-

U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, said the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains "a serious problem." The estimate suggests Bush "has the right strategy: intensified international pressure along with a willingness to negotiate a solution that serves Iranian interests, while ensuring the world will never have to face a nuclear armed Iran," Hadley said. He was less interested in what the 2005 assessment missed than what it got right: that Iran had a covert nuclear program.

So even the entire intelligence community of the empire is saying for fuck's sake do not attack Iran, it poses no threat and the consequences of attacking to America would be disastrous. This is the NIE Cheney delayed for a year to force it to include as much anti Iranian propaganda as possible-

• intelligence analysts have had to review and rewrite their findings three times, because of pressure from the White House.


• The White House has now apparently decided to release the unsatisfactory draft NIE, but without making its key findings public.


• Frank J. Gaffney, a protégé of neoconservative heavyweight Richard Perle, complained that Negroponte was “absurdly declaring the Iranian regime to be years away from having nuclear weapons”.


• an unsubtle signal to the intelligence community that the White House was determined to obtain a more alarmist conclusion on the Iranian nuclear programme.

So even with that, look at what it concludes- they stopped 4 years ago. The cabal in charge are the same mental patients who deliberately exaggerated the threat from the Soviets in the cold war, they lied us into the Iraq invasion, at exactly which fucking point do we stop them?

PS. As Hass a commenter at my blog added-

From IranAffairs.com:

Iran NIE report - Are you lying now, or were you lying then? If the 2005 NIE report was wrong, why should the 2007 NIE report be any more credible? If Iran really had a nuclear weapons program until 2003 as the new NIE says, then why has the IAEA found no evidence of it? WHy should we believe that Iran EVER had a nuclear weapons program at all?

Patterns of History: Compare & Contrast

I found the below timeline on David Swanson's site, it covers the run up to the Iraq war and it is interesting to read through it and see if any current events echo what was going on 5 years ago. He does not claim it to be comprehensive, but it is thought provoking. It runs March 17th '03 back to October 14th '02. So is déjà vu a neurological hiccup, a glitch in The Matrix or a sign that war pimps are not all that imaginative?

• March 17, 2003, There were 211,000 U.S. troops deployed to the area.
• March 17, 2003, Bush gave Saddam Hussein 48 hours to get out.
• March 12, 2003, The United States advertised its testing of the largest ever non-nuclear bomb.
• March 11, 2003, Bush said 30 days was too long to wait before launching war.
• March 9, 2003, Powell said United States would use military force to compel Saddam Hussein to comply with UN resolutions he'd already complied with. Rice said United States would lead a coalition to change the Iraq regime.
• March 5, 2003, Rumsfeld said that if the United States attacked Iraq it would be to change the regime, and General Tommy Franks said he was ready to attack Iraq.
• March 4, 2003, U.S. military officials said they had 225,000 troops in the area awaiting orders to attack.
• March 4, 2003, Marines and amphibious units deployed to Iraq, and Franks reviewed completed Iraq War plans with top commanders.
• February 28, 2003, There were 153,000 U.S. troops in the area, and Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley published his thoughts on post-war Iraq.
• February 27, 2003, A sixth carrier battle group was sent to Iraq, B-52 stealth bombers were sent to Diego Garcia, and a high ranking US diplomat John Brady Kiesling resigned in opposition to coming attack on Iraq.
• February 24, 2003, Rice claimed no new UN authorization needed to attack Iraq, Powell suggested the war might come in March, and media reported United States was training Iraqi rebels in Hungary.
• February 22, 2003, There were 126,000 U.S. troops in the area.
• February 21, 2003, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith told the media his thoughts on a post-war Iraq.
• February 20, 2003, Rumsfeld said coalition forces were ready to attack Iraq.
• February 17, 2003, There were 106,000 U.S. troops in the area, and the 3rd Armored Cavalry just deployed to Iraq.
• February 13, 2003, The Pentagon had by this point called up 150,000 Reserve and National Guard troops.
• February 12, 2003, Hadley laid out thoughts on post-war Iraq, and Powell said U.S. would attack if Iraq did not destroy the weapons it had long since destroyed (a fact that was publicly available).
• February 11, 2003, Feith gave Senate his thoughts on post-war Iraq.
• February 10, 2003, There were 100,000 U.S. troops in the area, and Rumsfeld enlisted commercial airlines to get them there.
• February 7, 2003, Rumsfeld told nations of the world to prepare for a war on Iraq, and sent a fifth carrier battle group to the area.
• February 6, 2003, U.S. Army ships helicopters to Iraq.
• February 3, 2003, U.S. military officials detail Iraq war plans to media. There were 70,000 troops in the area. And Time reported that CIA had been doing pre-war work in Iraq for months.
• January 31, 2003, massive U.S. airstrikes were weakening Iraq in preparation for war, and four carrier battle groups were sent to Iraq with a fifth on the way. U.S. troops in Germany were told to pack for Turkey.
• January 30, 2003, Bush says it will be weeks, not months. United States send weapons to Jordan to protect against retaliation by Iraq. U.S. troops in the area of Iraq were approaching 90,000 with known plans to increase to between 180,000 and 250,000. The Penatagon admitted that the CIA was already in northern Iraq.
• January 29, 2003, US ambassador to the UN John Negroponte said the window was closing, and Jordan allowed US troops to stage attack on Iraq from Jordan.
• January 24, 2003, US and UK military lobbied Turkey unsuccessfully for permission to attack Iraq from there.
• January 23, 2003, US military ships headed to Iraq raising presence to 4 battle groups. Australian troops also headed to Iraq.
• January 22, 2003, Guard and Reserves were called up in the US, while British troops and equipment headed to Iraq. Iraq claimed, as it had also on December 23rd, to have shot down an unmanned U.S. plane.
• January 21, 2003, British troops prepared to go to Iraq.
• January 20, 2003, There were 57,000 US troops in the area. Rumsfeld said troops were running out. British troop deployment was announced.
• January 19, 2003, Powell said time was running out. British troops mobilized.
• January 12, 2003, Rumsfeld signed orders to add 62,000 to the 60,000 U.S. troops in the area.
• January 11, 2003, Australian troop deployments announced.
• January 10, 2003, Gen. Meyers described US troops training Iraqis in Hungary.
• January 9, 2003, US soldiers called up.
• January 8, 2003, Central Command moved to Qatar and announced US troop deployments.
• January 6, 2003, US ships arrived in Gulf.
• January 2, 2003, Bush sent elite forces to Iraq.
• December 24 - 29, 2002, U.S. troops received deployment orders.
• December 23, 2002, 52,000 troops were in the area.
• December 22, 2002, Iraq invited the CIA in to inspect, and the CIA said no.
• December 18, 2002, Hungary agreed to let the United States train Iraqi exiles there.
• December 15, 2002, British Royal Navy announced deployment to Gulf. Dozens of teams of elite American soldiers and intelligence specialists had already been sent into Iraq with millions of dollars in cash to woo key tribal leaders away from Saddam Hussein.
• December 11, 2002, United States made deal with Qatar to use bases there to attack Iraq.
• December 9, 2002, United States rehearsed Iraq attack with war games in Qatar.
• December 8, 2002, US troop deployment plans announced.
• December 4, 2002, British Ministry of Defense reported 300 percent increase since March in bombs dropped on southern Iraq.
• December 3, 2002, US carrier battle group deployed to gulf, and Rumsfeld claimed US could attack Iraq without UN approval.
• December 2, 2002, United States set up headquarters in Qatar.
• November 2002 – March 2003, United States launches 120 air strikes in Iraq, compared with 110 in previous 34 months.
• November 21, 2002, United States was recruiting force in northern Iraq.
• November 7, 2002, U.S. base for B-2s set up on Diego Garcia.
• November 5, 2002, U.S. battle group deployed to Gulf.
• November 4, 2002, Kuwait allowed United States to attack Iraq from its bases.
• November 3, 2002, Pentagon outfitted unites with river-crossing equipment for the Euphrates.
• November 2, 2002, U.S. pilots practiced bombing southern Iraq.
• November 1, 2002, U.S. Navy sought merchant ships to transport huge amounts of ammunition to the Gulf.
• October 31, 2002, Boeing tested 500 lb. "smart bomb".
• October 29, 2002, U.S. ships deployed to Gulf.
• October 23, 2002, The CIA set up two stations in northern Iraq.
• October 14, 2002, The United States stationed six spy satelites over Iraq.
• October 14, 2002, Boeing factory went to double shifts to produce kits to turn "dumb bombs" into "smart bombs," enough "smart bombs" to attack Iraq.