0 votes

US to invade Iran any day now?

http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/30312

""
News
Send to friend | Print version
US to invade Iran any day now? September 11, 2008, 20:50
US to invade Iran any day now?
A few weeks ago the Russian newspaper Izvestia, a well-known and authoritive daily published nationwide and abroad, came forward with something that would have been looked upon as a conspiracy theory if published by a tabloid.

The paper suggested that by attacking South Ossetia, the Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili had badly damaged a planned U.S. military operation against Iran. In the newspaper's opinion Georgia was supposed to play the role of another "unsinkable aircraft carrier" for the U.S., i.e. an operational and tactical base for U.S.
aircraft that would be making bombing raids into Iran. Something akin to what Thailand was in the Vietnam war.

Thailand certainly benefited from the arrangement, and Georgia would have too, insists the paper, if its President hadn't put his ambitions above the US national interest and ended up beaten, disarmed, chewing on his neckties and totally incapable of providing whatever the U.S. needs from him.

That's why, according to Izvestia in yet another article on the matter, the U.S. response to the Russian retaliation was harsh in words but very mild in action. The latest on the issue suggests that Mikhail Saakashvili may be replaced any day now by direct order from Washington.

Having read the story in Izvestia I decided to try to figure out the extent of improbability and impossibility of the assumptions. As I was doing that, I remembered that early in August CNN had started showing U.S. generals who cried for more troops and hardware for Afghanistan which, in their opinion, was rapidly becoming a more intensive conflict than Iraq.

Shortly after that, a phone call came from a college friend who had just come back from Kandahar in Afghanistan, where he had seen American battle tanks being unloaded from a Ukrainian-registered Antonov-124 "Ruslan", the heaviest and largest cargo airplane in the world. The friend asked if I had any idea what tanks would be good for in Afghanistan, and I said I didn't. It's an established fact from the Soviet war in Afghanistan that tanks are no good for most of the country's mountainous territory. They are good for flatlands, and the main body of flat land in the region is right across the border in Iran.

Later in August there was another bit of unofficial information from a Russian military source: more than a thousand American tanks and armored vehicles had been shipped to Eastern Afghanistan by Ukrainian "Ruslans" flying in three to five shipments a day, and more flights were expected.

Somehow all this, together with the series of articles in Izvestia, the information that all U.S. troops in Afghanistan are going to be reassigned and regrouped under unified command, the arrival of NATO naval ships in the Black Sea, the appointment of a man used to command troops in a combat environment as the new commander of the US Central Command and other bits and pieces. To my total astonishment, when they all fell together the Izvestia story started looking slightly more credible than before.

Today the U.S. media reported that there had been a leak from the Pentagon about a secret Presidential order in which President Bush authorized his military (most of which is currently on Afghan soil) to conduct operations in Pakistan without the necessity for informing the Pakistani government. The U.S. military in Afghanistan - or shall we say in the whole region neighboring Iran - is getting a freer hand by the day. And it is getting more and more hardware to play with.

Of course it's quite clear now that Georgia has lost its immediate potential as a nearby airfield, but after all, the aircraft carriers in the Gulf are not so far away.

Believe me I'm not saying that the U.S. is going to start an all-out war against Iran tomorrow. But aren't there indications that it may happen the day after tomorrow, a month from now, or on any date before the official handover of Presidency in the U.S.? Or, as some suggest, before the election?

I'm just asking the questions. But there are some people, like those working for Izvestia, for instance, who answer them with a "yes".

Evgeny Belenkiy, RT. ""




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The US wanted an excuse NOT to bomb Iran

so it had Georgia start some shit. Heck, the US may have paid the Russians to act up too.

Now, the US can publically tell Israel "Hey guys, we were gonna bomb Iran fer ya, but now we need to focuse on this Russian thang...sorry."

The truth is that US politicians want more kickbacks from Israelis before toppling another one of their enemies.

The whole "Saddam never had WMDs" thing was bull. The US could have planted them or lied about them easily. Instead, they kept up the anti-war movement (hell, they probably ran it) so they can hang it over Israel's head saying "See how much we are giving up?! The world hates us."

Israel knows all this, of course, and has their own negotiation-based tricks. Has anyone seen Traitor? There's a nice little fear-mongering film to keep the US people focused on Israel's foes.

And other countries are probably in on this too. China may be saying "Okay, you have the oil pipeline! How about spreading that love over here. Here's some money so you can stop pounding sand in the middle east." Thus, the Georgia/Russia thing sprouted up.

The whole US/China relationship really needs to be explored more. Sometimes I think they control us, sometimes I think we control them. But there is something definately substantial there.