I have no doubt that the attack on Iran is now inevitable, planned and decided upon. We will have to wait for a month or two of sheep-prepping but I firmly believe it is now inevitable.
And so do many in the Intelligence Community.
Given that an insane and blood-crazed bunch of maniacs are planning yet again to conduct an unprovoked attack - this time using nuclear weapons - on a sovereign state, I was wondering what the Americans on the board actually feel would be an appropriate stance for themselves and for Iran to react with?
I am not interested in hearing from the Stepford-drones who have been panting for this ever since the orgasm of Iraq wore off (you know who you are), I am just wondering what the general opinion would be now it appears to becoming a reality.
In a connected note, I think the French will be in for a shock. They opposed Iraq - and rightly so - and at least had some integrity. with the advent of Sarkozy it seems that they too have been co-opted into the New Order.
France is now being used as the UK was as a mouthpiece (useful idiot?) in the drumbeat lead-up to the slaughter: France warning of war with Iran.
Of course part of that deal would be to put troops on the ground - the US will need some cannon fodder - so I wonder how chirpy they'll be when they start dying over there?
As for me, I think we should get on with it. The Bush cabals are sick psychopaths and unless they are stopped they will only cause more death and destruction. I honestly now view it the same as stopping Hitler; a cause worth dying for to make a safer world.
If it has to be Iran that does this then so be it - I think it will be ugly though because the bullies don't like a straight fair fight. Thoughts?
And so do many in the Intelligence Community.
Quote:
Senior American intelligence and defence officials believe that President George W Bush and his inner circle are taking steps to place America on the path to war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.
Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran, amid growing fears among serving officers that diplomatic efforts to slow Iran's nuclear weapons programme are doomed to fail.
Pentagon and CIA officers say they believe that the White House has begun a carefully calibrated programme of escalation that could lead to a military showdown with Iran.
Now it has emerged that Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, who has been pushing for a diplomatic solution, is prepared to settle her differences with Vice-President Dick Cheney and sanction military action.
In a chilling scenario of how war might come, a senior intelligence officer warned that public denunciation of Iranian meddling in Iraq - arming and training militants - would lead to cross border raids on Iranian training camps and bomb factories.
A prime target would be the Fajr base run by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force in southern Iran, where Western intelligence agencies say armour-piercing projectiles used against British and US troops are manufactured.
Under the theory - which is gaining credence in Washington security circles - US action would provoke a major Iranian response, perhaps in the form of moves to cut off Gulf oil supplies, providing a trigger for air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities and even its armed forces.
Senior officials believe Mr Bush's inner circle has decided he does not want to leave office without first ensuring that Iran is not capable of developing a nuclear weapon.
The intelligence source said: "No one outside that tight circle knows what is going to happen." But he said that within the CIA "many if not most officials believe that diplomacy is failing" and that "top Pentagon brass believes the same".
He said: "A strike will probably follow a gradual escalation. Over the next few weeks and months the US will build tensions and evidence around Iranian activities in Iraq."
The vice president is said to advocate the use of bunker-busting tactical nuclear weapons against Iran's nuclear sites. His allies dispute this, but Mr Cheney is understood to be lobbying for air strikes if sites can be identified where Revolutionary Guard units are training Shia militias.
Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran, amid growing fears among serving officers that diplomatic efforts to slow Iran's nuclear weapons programme are doomed to fail.
Pentagon and CIA officers say they believe that the White House has begun a carefully calibrated programme of escalation that could lead to a military showdown with Iran.
Now it has emerged that Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, who has been pushing for a diplomatic solution, is prepared to settle her differences with Vice-President Dick Cheney and sanction military action.
In a chilling scenario of how war might come, a senior intelligence officer warned that public denunciation of Iranian meddling in Iraq - arming and training militants - would lead to cross border raids on Iranian training camps and bomb factories.
A prime target would be the Fajr base run by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force in southern Iran, where Western intelligence agencies say armour-piercing projectiles used against British and US troops are manufactured.
Under the theory - which is gaining credence in Washington security circles - US action would provoke a major Iranian response, perhaps in the form of moves to cut off Gulf oil supplies, providing a trigger for air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities and even its armed forces.
Senior officials believe Mr Bush's inner circle has decided he does not want to leave office without first ensuring that Iran is not capable of developing a nuclear weapon.
The intelligence source said: "No one outside that tight circle knows what is going to happen." But he said that within the CIA "many if not most officials believe that diplomacy is failing" and that "top Pentagon brass believes the same".
He said: "A strike will probably follow a gradual escalation. Over the next few weeks and months the US will build tensions and evidence around Iranian activities in Iraq."
The vice president is said to advocate the use of bunker-busting tactical nuclear weapons against Iran's nuclear sites. His allies dispute this, but Mr Cheney is understood to be lobbying for air strikes if sites can be identified where Revolutionary Guard units are training Shia militias.
Given that an insane and blood-crazed bunch of maniacs are planning yet again to conduct an unprovoked attack - this time using nuclear weapons - on a sovereign state, I was wondering what the Americans on the board actually feel would be an appropriate stance for themselves and for Iran to react with?
I am not interested in hearing from the Stepford-drones who have been panting for this ever since the orgasm of Iraq wore off (you know who you are), I am just wondering what the general opinion would be now it appears to becoming a reality.
In a connected note, I think the French will be in for a shock. They opposed Iraq - and rightly so - and at least had some integrity. with the advent of Sarkozy it seems that they too have been co-opted into the New Order.
France is now being used as the UK was as a mouthpiece (useful idiot?) in the drumbeat lead-up to the slaughter: France warning of war with Iran.
Of course part of that deal would be to put troops on the ground - the US will need some cannon fodder - so I wonder how chirpy they'll be when they start dying over there?
As for me, I think we should get on with it. The Bush cabals are sick psychopaths and unless they are stopped they will only cause more death and destruction. I honestly now view it the same as stopping Hitler; a cause worth dying for to make a safer world.
If it has to be Iran that does this then so be it - I think it will be ugly though because the bullies don't like a straight fair fight. Thoughts?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
\
[/CENTER]
I'm just trying to think like those loopy noecon artists, no telling what they all will be up to before "Chimpy has left the building!" 
