Monday, January 30, 2006

The Prospects of a Nuclear Attack on Iran. Part Three: Initiating the war against Iran.

Updated March 7th 2006.
Who will start the War against Iran?
An increasing number of commentators have pointed out that the jews-only state in palestine, and the jews in america who give primary loyalty to the jews-only state, are at the forefront of the campaign to push america into a war against iran. (Please see ‘Jews Stirring up World War Three: The Zog War Against Iran’. However, which country, america or the jews-only state, would initiate an attack on iran is a matter of speculation. There are four options.

Firstly, it is possible the jews-only state in palestine will launch the initial raid. However, despite the jews-only state’s formidable military capabilities some commentators do not believe it has the capability for destroying iran’s nuclear facilities, "As for the Israelis, they would attack Iran in a New York second – if they had the capability, and I don't believe they do. If they take a northern route, they will need permission from Turkey to use its airspace. They won't get it. If they fly to the south through airspace we control, they would need our permission, and that's not at all certain. Moreover, they don't have the planes capable of taking enough ordnance to do sufficient damage to fortified, underground installations that are widely dispersed." (Charley Reese ‘Iran's Bomb’ January 21, 2006).

Virtually all commentators discussing this issue assume the jews-only state will use its airforce to attack iran. But this is not its only option. It could launch a missile attack - it might even be tempted to use some of its nuclear missiles. Another possibility is to launch cruise missiles from one or more of its submarines just off the iranian coast in the persian gulf, "Israel’s acquisition from Germany a few years ago of three Dolphin-class submarines capable of launching conventional and nuclear-tipped cruise missiles? The 1,720-ton diesel-electric submarines are among the most technically advanced subs of their kind in the world. Each can be equipped with four cruise missiles, which Israel reportedly tested in the Indian Ocean in 1999. (Uzi Mahnaimi and Matthew Campbell, "Israel Makes Nuclear Waves with Submarine Missile Test," London Sunday Times, June 18, 2000). The subs will cruise the Mediterranean, the Red Sea, and, ominously, the Persian Gulf -which tends to confirm the views of the late Israeli scholar, Israel Shahak, a leading dissident, who argued that Israel’s strategic goal is hegemony from Morocco to Pakistan. (See Israel Shahak, Open Secrets, 1997, chapters four and eight)." (Mark Gaffney ‘Will Iran Be Next?’ May 8th 2003); "Moreover, reported in late 2003, Israeli Dolphin-class submarines equipped with US Harpoon missiles armed with nuclear warheads are now aimed at Iran. (See Gordon Thomas," (Michel Chossudovsky ‘Nuclear War against Iran’ January 3, 2006).

The second option as regards who will initiate the attack on iran is that the jews-only state in palestine and america will launch a co-ordinated attack. This is feasible given the level of integration between the two forces but politically america would prefer the jews-only state not to get involved because of the likelihood that it would stimulate even greater opposition to the war within the arab/moslem/persian worlds.

The third option is that the jews-only state will use its political power to push or blackmail the bush administration into initiating the war whilst the zionists sit on the sidelines - as happened in the first gulf war and america’s invasion of iraq. Why would the jews-only state launch the initial attack, or even get involved in the war at all, if it can get the americans to do its dirty work?

Justin raimondo suspects the jews-only state won’t attack iran because it believes it can get the americans to initiate the war, and suffer the consequences. "The Israelis are now engaging in a bit of blustering, hinting broadly that they are ready to nip Iran's nuclear program in the bud by conducting a raid similar to that carried out at Osirak, Iraq, in 1981, when Israeli warplanes bombed Saddam's nascent nuclear facility. That probably isn't going to happen in this case, however, for two reasons: (1) The geographical spread of the various suspected nuclear sites prevents any attempt to knock them out in a single blow, or even several blows, and (2) Instead of fighting their own battles, the Israelis would much rather use the U.S. to do their dirty work, whenever possible – and that seems highly possible given their past success in this area." (Justin Raimondo ‘Spy With a Heart of Gold?’ January 25, 2006).

To date, the bush administration seems to have been following the same international preparations for an attack on iran as it pursued in the run up to its attack on iraq. Raimondo, however, rather surprisingly seems to believe the bushies are resisting the wishes of their jewish masters. "When it comes to Iran, though, their (israelis) strategy is just beginning to be put into practice – and is running up against a major roadblock in the reluctance of the Bushies to climb on board." (Justin Raimondo ‘Spy With a Heart of Gold?’ January 25, 2006). He even believes the american host is about to expel its zionist parasites, "When a parasite invades, it hides as long as it can, sucking the vital juices and draining the energy of its host. Yet there is a limit to what the host can tolerate: eventually, it either builds up an immunity to the depredations of its "guest," or it is sucked dry and exhausted to the point of near-death. Having used up nearly all available military and economic resources in Iraq, the U.S. has a choice: it can either build up an immunity to Israeli influence, even a partial one, or it can let itself be turned into a dry husk, a casualty of Tel Aviv's ambitions." (Justin Raimondo ‘Spy With a Heart of Gold?’ January 25, 2006).

Raimondo’s analysis of the bushies probably derived from jim lobe, "That the administration, which promulgated and then implemented a doctrine of preventive war against presumed enemies allegedly bent on acquiring weapons of mass destruction, should come under attack from all these sources for excessive passivity is ironic. But it is also testimony to the degree that it has been forced by its Iraq adventure to adopt what can only be described - to the disgust of the neo-conservatives, in particular - as both a new humility and a new realism with regard to Tehran. Noting how Iraq had overstretched US ground forces, officials who bragged in the immediate aftermath of the Iraq invasion in 2003 that "everyone wants to go to Baghdad, [but] real men want to go to Tehran", now admit that such an option is completely out of the question. The most Washington can do militarily, in their opinion, is to use air power to take out as many nuclear-related sites as possible - reportedly more than 300, requiring three days of non-stop bombing - and hope for the best. But the military option - exercised early and eagerly in Iraq - is seen as the absolute last resort by the administration. Contrary to its neo-conservative and Democratic critics, the White House concedes that the potential costs of an attack - skyrocketing oil prices, a renewed Shi'ite insurgency in southern Iraq, a wave of terrorist attacks by Lebanon's Hezbollah, and new schisms in a North Atlantic Treaty Organization alliance that Washington has tried hard to mend - could very well outweigh the benefits." (Jim Lobe ‘The Iranian neo-cons love to hate’ Jan 26, 2006).

Ok, let’s pretend the bushies are refusing to countenance a pre-emptive american attack on iran and decide to disobey their jewish masters. What are the likely consequences?

Politically, the jewish lobby in america will do its best to bring about the election of hillary clinton as next president of the united states since she’s agreed to do the jews’ dirty work for them. "In short, if Bush does not confront Iran on the nuclear issue with sanctions or air strikes, he may find himself confronted by Israelis and their U.S. auxiliaries. Hearken to Hillary Clinton: "I don't believe you face threats like Iran and North Korea by outsourcing it to others and standing on the sidelines. But let's be clear about the threat we face now: A nuclear Iran is a danger to Israel, to its neighbors and beyond." Hillary is saying that if George Bush does not confront Iran, he is open to the charge of leaving Israel to face a nuclear attack by a regime that has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. Political hardball." (Quoted in Patrick J Buchanan ‘Bush's Dilemma: Iran vs. Israel’ January 25, 2006).

Militarily, if the jews-only state in palestine realizes it cannot lobby the bush administration into attacking iran, it might use its nuclear weapons to politically blackmail america into launching a war against iran. In 1973, the jews-only state in palestine used nuclear blackmail to force the nixon administration into sending military hardware to the jewish army to defeat the advancing arab armies – even though the result of this american intervention was an arab oil embargo that pushed america and the rest of the world into a decade long recession. In 1990, the jews-only state once again used nuclear blackmail against the bush senior administration to force it into removing saddam from kuwait even though saddam had been a loyal ally to america over the previous decade. In 2003, jews pushed america into the invasion of iraq – although whether this was the result of nuclear blackmail or political pressure from the jewish lobby in america is not known – although the latter is more likely.

The fourth option is that the jews-only state in palestine will launch a token attack against iran in order to provoke retaliation from iran. George wmd bush has promised to defend the jews-only state from any attack by iran. "What President George W. Bush, Fox News, and the Washington Times were saying about Iraq three years ago they are now saying about Iran. After Saturday's vote by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to report Iran's suspicious nuclear activities to the UN Security Council, the president wasted no time in warning, "The world will not permit the Iranian regime to gain nuclear weapons." More recently, in the case of Iran, President Bush has been unabashed in naming Israel as the most probable target of any Iranian nuclear weapons. He has also created a rhetorical lash-up of the U.S. and Israel, referring three times in the past two weeks to Israel as an "ally" of the U.S., as if to condition Americans to the notion that the U.S. is required to join Israel in any confrontation with Iran. For example, on Feb. 1 the president told the press, "Israel is a solid ally of the United States; we will rise to Israel's defense if need be." Asked if he meant the U.S. would rise to Israel's defense militarily, Bush replied with a startlingly open-ended commitment, "You bet, we'll defend Israel."" (Ray McGovern Juggernaut Gathering Momentum: Next Stop, Iran’ February 8, 2006). In effect then if iran retaliates it will trigger a war with america. If it retaliates against american forces in the middle east then america will obviously respond. If iran retaliates only against the jews-only state this too will bring in the americans. The only reason the jews-only state will initiate an attack on iran is to force america into the conflict when iran retaliates against the attack.

According to pat buchanan, bush is now in a dire political situation: he has either got to attack iran or he’s got to rebuff the jews-only lobby, and the jewish media, in america and prevent the jews-only state in palestine from launching a pre-emptive military attack on iran. "If America does not strike, Mofaz is saying, Israel will. Yet, as that could produce the same results as an American attack, without the same assurance of success, Bush may have to restrain Israel, if he does not want a wider war." (Patrick J Buchanan ‘Bush's Dilemma: Iran vs. Israel’ January 25, 2006). In other words, bush has either got to obey his jewish masters or suffer the consequences of disobedience – just as his father suffered at the hands of the jewish lobby.

Let’s develop this scenario and assume the unimaginable: the bushies refuse to follow the advice of america’s jewish lobbies and resist the jews-only state’s nuclear blackmail. Once the jews-only state realizes it cannot politically shift the bushies, it will conclude that’s its only remaining option is to launch a token attack on iran. There is virtually nothing the united states could do to stop such an attack. What happens when the freebie jets that the bush administration recently gave to the jews-only state to enable it to bomb iran, start flying over american occupied iraq on their way to iran? Is bush going to order the american military to shoot down these american warplanes with their israeli pilots to prevent them from reaching iran? Or is he going to pretend he can’t see them and hope the iranians won’t retaliate against either america or the jews-only state thereby propelling him into what will be the third proxy zionist war in the middle east? What is going to happen if the jews-only state tries to use one of its submarines in the arabian sea to launch a nuclear cruise missile attack on iran? Is george going to order his navy to sink the sub before it fires? The jews-only state knows only too well that once iran retaliates against america or the jews-only state there will be no chance for bush to keep america out of the war. The jews-only state knows that if it attacks iran and iran retaliates against either the jews-only state or american forces in the middle east then there will be a huge public outcry in america for a war against iran. This will invariably push bush into the war he supposedly doesn’t want. Basically, the jewish lobby in america and the jewish dominated american media is better at manipulating american public opinion than the bush administration. No matter how much the bushies are opposed to such a war (and there is no evidence they do) the jews will exploit any attack on american forces in the middle east or the jews-only state in palestine to whip up public demands in america for revenge against iran. America will get rapidly sucked into the conflict. The jews-only state has got the americans by the balls. It’s just a question of how hard they want to squeeze. As jeffrey blankfort has pointed out, "There is considerable speculation that Israel will attack Iran, even if the US is hesitant, because this is an election year and Israel knows and the lobby knows that anything Israel does at such times will be applauded by Congress and we may end up with the same result in Iraq." (Jeffrey Blankfort quoted in Réseau Voltaire ‘The Chomsky/Blankfort Polemic’ February 20, 2006).

The reality of the situation is that there is nothing the bushies can do to stop the jews-only state from entangling america in a war against iran. This is why america’s jewish elite rules america not the president of the united states. Even worse is that if the jews-only state participates in an american war against iran in order ‘to support its american ally’, americans will love the jews-only state even more – despite the fact that they have just been manipulated into committing political, economic, and military suicide. By the time the war is over, america will have been "sucked dry and exhausted to the point of near-death" (justin raimondo). But at least americans will have had the pleasure of serving their israeli masters and boosting jewish world domination.

The point of the jews-only state launching a pre-emptive, token, attack on iran would not be to destroy iran’s nuclear facilities but merely to provoke iranian retaliation in order to bring the americans into the war since they have the military power to destroy iran’s nuclear industry and its nuclear infrastructure. One strike will probably be enough to force iran into retaliating which will almost inevitably bring in the americans. In effect, the americans are checkmated by jewish warmongers.

The Bluffing Game.
Jeffrey blankfort has stated, "What we are seeing is a game of international poker, with the US spreading this disinformation about a pending attack as a high stakes bluff, aided, ironically, by a host of the administration's critics whose shallow analysis seems to be part of our daily email fare. The Iranians know they have the winning hand for this round, at least." (Jeff Blankfort ‘Critique: Petrodollars and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation’ February 15th 2006).

The implication of the bluffing thesis is that the bush administration is behind all the manoeuvres in the bluffing game – aided unintentionally by his critics. It is probably true that the bush administration is placing stories in the media to exert pressure on iran to give up its nuclear energy dreams. But many of the media reports are probably concocted by jewish zionists trying to pressure the bushies into a war. If they can hype up the threat enough then bush will have to go to war against iran whether he’s bluffing or not. The jews-only state has little to lose from the war and everything to gain from pushing america into a war. What does it matter to them that thousands of american troops might get slaughtered in iraq as a result of such a war? They don’t care about america other than using it to promote the interests of the jews-only state in palestine.

It is possible the bushies are opposed to a war against iran and are just bluffing about an attack on iran. But it is highly unlikely the jews-only state is bluffing. Firstly, it has got the bush administration by the balls and it is highly unlikely it is going to waste the opportunity of using america to do its dirty work against iran. Secondly, the jews-only state cannot afford to be seen to be bluffing. It has twice threatened to use its nuclear weapons against the arab world in order to blackmail america into supporting the jews-only state – firstly in 1973 during the arab-jew war and then in 1991 removing saddam from kuwait. If the jews-only state bluffs over an attack on iran then america will never again take seriously the jews-only state’s attempts at nuclear blackmail and the jews-only state will have lost a critical grip over the world’s biggest military.

In the end it is irrelevant whether the bushies are bluffing or not about a war against iran. If they are bluffing and iran calls america’s bluff then bush has no other option but to go to war because otherwise his reputation and that of the american military will be shattered.

The ability of america’s jewish elite to manipulate america into wars that benefit only the jews-only state is a clear indication of jewish supremacism over america. This is why america is just a colony of the jews-only state in palestine. America’s jewish elite controls america’s vast military power which enables it to promote jewish world domination.

It doesn’t matter to Iran who starts the War against Iran.
From iran’s perspective, it doesn’t matter whether it is attacked first by america or by the jews-only state in palestine because, given that bush has vowed to protect the jews-only state, as soon as it retaliates against either american forces in the middle east or against the jews-only state then america will attack iran. Even if iran is careful to retaliate only against the jews-only state, america will immediately become involved in the war.

If the jews-only state initiates the attack on iran, the iranians will blame america for a number of reasons. If iran is attacked by air it will blame america firstly, for allowing the jews-only bombers to pass over iraq. Secondly, because america provided the jews-only state with these aircraft, and bunker busting bombs, to attack iran. "The US Navy will come under fire even if the US does not participate in the first so-called surgical raids on Iran’s nuclear sites, that is, even if Israel goes it alone. Israel’s brand-new fleet of 25 F-15s (paid for by American taxpayers) has sufficient range to target Iran, but the Israelis cannot mount an attack without crossing US-occupied Iraqi air space. It will hardly matter if Washington gives the green light, or is dragged into the conflict by a recalcitrant Israel. Either way, the result will be the same. The Iranians will interpret US acquiescence as complicity, and, in any event, they will understand that the real fight is with the Americans. The Iranians will be entirely within their rights to counter-attack in self-defense. Most of the world will see it this way, and will support them, not America. The US and Israel will be viewed as the aggressors, even as the unfortunate US sailors in harm’s way become cannon fodder. In the Gulf’s shallow and confined waters evasive maneuvers will be difficult, at best, and escape impossible. Even if US planes control of the skies over the battlefield, the sailors caught in the net below will be hard-pressed to survive. The Gulf will run red with American blood…" (Mark Gaffney ‘Iran: A Bridge too Far?’ October 26th 2004).

If iran is attacked by missiles launched from the jews-only state’s submarines then iran can blame america for financing these weapons.

In the following analysis the phrase zog war will be used to cover all three options for the initial attack on iran. There are virtually no significant political or military differences between a war against iran that is initiated by the zionist occupied government of america or by the jews-only state in palestine or by both.