My RSS Feeds
Bush Pentagon Planning 3-DAY BLITZ BOMBING Of 1200 Targets In IRAN Per London Times: Where There's Oil, You'll Find Bush! - RI10
Bush Pentagon
Planning 3-DAY
BLITZ BOMBING Of
1200 Targets In
IRAN Per London
Times: Where
There’s Oil, You’ll
Find Bush! - RI10
Who are OPEC Member Countries?
The OPEC Statute stipulates that: "any country with a substantial net export of crude petroleum, which has fundamentally similar interests to those of Member Countries, may become a Full Member of the Organization, if accepted by a majority of three-fourths of Full Members, including the concurring votes of all Founder Members".
The Statute further distinguishes among three categories of membership: Founder Member, Full Member and Associate Member.
Founder Members of the Organization are those countries which were represented at OPEC's first Conference, held in Baghdad, Iraq, in September 1960, and which signed the original agreement establishing OPEC.
Full Members are the Founder Members, plus those countries whose applications for Membership have been accepted by the Conference.
Associate Members are the countries, which do not qualify for full membership, but which are nevertheless admitted under such special conditions as may be prescribed by the Conference.
http://www.opec.org/library/FAQs/aboutOPEC/q3.htm
Tabacco: Any relationship between the OPEC countries and Bush’s Current Pentagon Plans to BOMB IRAN is purely INTENTIONAL!
What’s Missing this time around? Do you notice anything different this time as opposed to when Bush planned the Iran Invasion? Answer: The United Nations! This time Bush won’t even give lip-service to the UN. He won’t even attempt to put together a “Coalition of the Willing”. Why? Because he can’t. The UN would have blocked his Iraq Invasion had it come to a vote. The UN certainly would block his Iran Invasion this time also. This will be just another “Preemptive Oil Strike”!
Report: U.S. Military Planning Massive Air Strikes
Against Iran
The Sunday Times in London is reporting the Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive air strikes against twelve hundred targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians' military capability in three days. Alexis Debat of the Nixon Center told the paper that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran's nuclear facilities. Instead, he said, military planners are talking about trying to take out the entire Iranian military. President Bush has recently intensified the rhetoric against Iran. Last week he accused Tehran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust”. He warned that the US and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late”.
Bush Makes Surprise Visit To Iraq
President Bush made a surprise visit to Iraq on Monday. He spent six hours at a U.S. air base in Anbar province and met with top U.S. military and Iraqi political leaders. The president suggested that a reduction of U.S. troops in Iraq is possible.
* President Bush: "I'm going to tell you this about the decision, about my decision about troop levels -- those decisions will be based on a calm assessment by our military commanders on the conditions on the ground, not a nervous reaction by Washington politicians to poll results in the media [hoorah!] In other words, when we begin to draw down troops from Iraq, it will be from a position of strength and success, not from a position of fear and failure."
President Bush said remarkable changes had taken place in Anbar because of the so-called U.S. surge. But military analysts have disputed Bush's claim. The Associated Press reports the progress in Anbar was initiated by the Iraqis themselves. Sunni tribes decided to fight and retake control from al-Qaida many months before the president decided to send an extra 4,000 Marines to Anbar as part of his troop buildup. In addition, Middle East analyst Juan Cole said Anbar province remains more violent than President Bush let on. One quarter of all US troops killed in Iraq in July died in the province. 80 percent of the population in Anbar remains unemployed.
Anti-War & Climate Change Protests Greet Bush
In Australia
President Bush stopped in Iraq on his way to Australia where he is attending the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Sydney. The APEC summit brings Bush together with 20 other world leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and China's Hu Jintao. Climate change is expected to top the summit's agenda. Outside the summit, anti-war protesters gathered earlier today to denounce President Bush.
* Alex Bainbridge, protester: "We have organised this rally because we can not sit on the sidelines while a warmonger like George Bush comes to this country. We cannot sit on the sidelines in the face of innocent people being killed everyday in Iraq, with the support of the Australian government, in our name. We cannot sit by and watch these things happen. We are here today to say that George Bush is not welcome in this country. We are not intimidated and our protest will be going ahead on Saturday."
On Saturday, up to 20,000 protesters are expected to take part in a rally organized by the Stop Bush Coalition. Environmental groups have also been staging demonstrations urging the APEC nations to take action to cut the emission of greenhouse gases. 11 protesters were arrested today after they chained themselves by the neck to equipment at the world's biggest coal port, Newcastle – north of Sydney.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/04/144231
From The Sunday Times
September 2, 2007
Pentagon ‘three-day blitz’ plan for Iran
Sarah Baxter, Washington
THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.
Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military”, he said.
Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: “Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.” It was, he added, a “very legitimate strategic calculus”.
President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week, accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust”. He warned that the US and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late”.
One Washington source said the “temperature was rising” inside the administration. Bush was “sending a message to a number of audiences”, he said – to the Iranians and to members of the United Nations security council who are trying to weaken a tough third resolution on sanctions against Iran for flouting a UN ban on uranium enrichment.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last week reported “significant” cooperation with Iran over its nuclear programme and said that uranium enrichment had slowed. Tehran has promised to answer most questions from the agency by November, but Washington fears it is stalling to prevent further sanctions. Iran continues to maintain it is merely developing civilian nuclear power.
Bush is committed for now to the diplomatic route but thinks Iran is moving towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. According to one well-placed source, Washington believes it would be prudent to use rapid, overwhelming force, should military action become necessary.
Israel, which has warned it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, has made its own preparations for airstrikes and is said to be ready to attack if the Americans back down.
Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which uncovered the existence of Iran’s uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, said the IAEA was being strung along. “A number of nuclear sites have not even been visited by the IAEA”, he said. “They’re giving a clean bill of health to a regime that is known to have practised deception.”
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, irritated the Bush administration last week by vowing to fill a “power vacuum” in Iraq. But Washington believes Iran is already fighting a proxy war with the Americans in Iraq.
The Institute for the Study of War last week released a report by Kimberly Kagan that explicitly uses the term “proxy war” and claims that with the Sunni insurgency and Al-Qaeda in Iraq “increasingly under control”, Iranian intervention is the “next major problem the coalition must tackle”.
Bush noted that the number of attacks on US bases and troops by Iranian-supplied munitions had increased in recent months – “despite pledges by Iran to help stabilise the security situation in Iraq”.
It explains, in part, his lack of faith in diplomacy with the Iranians. But Debat believes the Pentagon’s plans for military action involve the use of so much force that they are unlikely to be used and would seriously stretch resources in Afghanistan and Iraq.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2369001.ece
Tabacco: My congressman, Steve Israel of Long Island, NY, said to my face, “I would never vote not to support the troops!” That piece of SOPHISTRY still sticks in my craw! Instead of attempting to get George W. Bush to recall the troops and stop the CARNAGE, Steve Israel should have been voting to STOP FUNDING THE WAR(S). That’s the only strategy that will work. Any Democrat, who votes to fund the War, is not SUPPORTING THE TROOPS, he or she is SUPPORTING THE WAR(S) FOR PROFIT – PURE & SIMPLE!
Now Bush is preparing to start War on a 3rd Front: I-R-A-N! Remember we are already engaged in military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Please note Bush’s Pentagon is NOT drawing up plans for a 3-Day Blitz of North Korea. North Korea is NOT a member of OPEC! When we invaded Afghanistan, many members of Bush’s inner circle wanted to invade Iraq at that time instead of Afghanistan. Cheney said, “Iraq has better targets” – Translation: “Iraq has OIL; Afghanistan only represents a Pipeline!”
You’ve heard the Bush TEASE that he “might” bring a few troops home sometime in the future from Iraq.
If you are a woman, and a man said to you he’d like to get some nooky right now and he “might marry you sometime in the future”, you might give him some nooky or you might not, but you would know that TEASE was only said to get what he wants.
If you are a man, and a woman said to you she’d like to get some money right now and she “might marry you or give you some nooky sometime in the future”, you might be strong enough to withhold the funds or you might not (being a man, you generally leave all major decisions to your penis), but in your heart you know that your chances are slim at best; you know it’s just a TEASE.
A TEASE is usually disingenuous. It is a TEASE and nothing more. Have you ever “loaned” money to someone, who promised with genuine sincerity that he or she would pay you back promptly? And that person either paid you back “unpromptly” or never? That was a TEASE!
If you can spot a TEASE when someone uses it to get what he or she wants from you, why can’t you spot the TEASE when president George W. Bush says it? It’s the same thing:
Tabacco: I consider myself both a funnel and a filter. I funnel information, not readily available on the Mass Media, which is ignored and/or suppressed. I filter out the irrelevancies and trivialities to save both the time and effort of my Readers and bring consternation to the enemies of Truth & Fairness! When you read Tabacco, if you don’t learn something NEW, I’ve wasted your time.
In 1981's 'Body Heat', Kathleen Turner said, "Knowledge is power".
T.A.B.A.C.C.O. (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization) – Think Tank For Other 95% Of World