Dick Cheny soon to start fearmongering and false flag attacks to start another war... - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

RichC · #1 02-13-2010, 04:05 AM

White House Leak: Cheney's Plan for Iran Attack Starts With Israeli Missile Strike

High-ranking military experts say an attack would lead to world economic chaos, or even what Bush calls 'World War III.'
October 26, 2007 |

US Vice President Dick Cheney -- the power behind the throne, the eminence grise, the man with the (very) occasional grandfatherly smile -- is notorious for his propensity for secretiveness and behind-the-scenes manipulation. He's capable of anything, say friends as well as enemies. Given this reputation, it's no big surprise that Cheney has already asked for a backroom analysis of how a war with Iran might begin.

In the scenario concocted by Cheney's strategists, Washington's first step would be to convince Israel to fire missiles at Iran's uranium enrichment plant in Natanz. Tehran would retaliate with its own strike, providing the US with an excuse to attack military targets and nuclear facilities in Iran.

This information was leaked by an official close to the vice president. Cheney himself hasn't denied engaging in such war games. For years, in fact, he's been open about his opinion that an attack on Iran, a member of US President George W. Bush's "Axis of Evil," is inevitable.

Given these not-too-secret designs, Democrats and Republicans alike have wondered what to make of the still mysterious Israeli bombing run in Syria on Sept. 6. Was it part of an existing war plan? A test run, perhaps? For days after the attack, one question dominated conversation at Washington receptions: How great is the risk of war, really?

Grandiose Plans, East and West

In the September strike, Israeli bombers were likely targeting a nuclear reactor under construction, parts of which are alleged to have come from North Korea. It is possible that key secretaries in the Bush cabinet even tried to stop Israel. To this day, the administration has neither confirmed nor commented on the attack.

Nevertheless, in Washington, Israel's strike against Syria has revived the specter of war with Iran. For the neoconservatives it could represent a glimmer of hope that the grandiose dream of a democratic Middle East has not yet been buried in the ashes of Iraq. But for realists in the corridors of the State Department and the Pentagon, military action against Iran is a nightmare they have sought to avert by asking a simple question: "What then?"

INAPPROPRIATE
B.C.

Jim B. · #2 02-13-2010, 04:58 AM

This was over 2 years ago, I don't know why you bring it up now, without suggesting Cheney and Bush should be hauled before the International Court of Justice at the Hague for their trials as war criminals and for trials against humanity like African dictators or Yugoslavian Generals.

RichC · #3 02-13-2010, 05:51 AM

New York Times Spins Ahmadinejad Speech as Claim About Nuke Capability

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/02/11/new-york-times-spins-ahmadinejad-speech-as-claim-about-nuke-capability/
Iranian President Emphasized Need for Medical Isotopes

by Jason Ditz, February 11, 2010

Email This | Print This | Share This | Comment | Antiwar Forum
An article in today’s New York Times spins a speech given today by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the anniversary of the nation’s revolution anniversary as a “pugnacious” declaration of “capacity to make weapons-grade nuclear fuel,” even though Ahmadinejad never made any such claims in the speech.

MS Fowler · #4 02-13-2010, 06:31 AM

How is anti war column that spins a NYT article as spin in anyway "news"?

strelnik · #5 02-13-2010, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichC

New York Times Spins Ahmadinejad Speech as Claim About Nuke Capability

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/02/11/new-york-times-spins-ahmadinejad-speech-as-claim-about-nuke-capability/
Iranian President Emphasized Need for Medical Isotopes

by Jason Ditz, February 11, 2010

Email This | Print This | Share This | Comment | Antiwar Forum
An article in today’s New York Times spins a speech given today by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the anniversary of the nation’s revolution anniversary as a “pugnacious” declaration of “capacity to make weapons-grade nuclear fuel,” even though Ahmadinejad never made any such claims in the speech.

So does the New York Times have a copy IN FARSI of the speech, which was spoken, and which they translated? If not, it's all spin. It's mongering on the subject of mongering

I'm getting real tired of this he said-she said nonsense.

RichC · #6 02-13-2010, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strelnik

So does the New York Times have a copy IN FARSI of the speech, which was spoken, and which they translated? If not, it's all spin. It's mongering on the subject of mongering

I'm getting real tired of this he said-she said nonsense.

Of cource they have a copy of the speach.

How could they not have a copy ???

RichC · #7 02-13-2010, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

How is anti war column that spins a NYT article as spin in anyway "news"?

Man, you really have trouble grasping the meaning of posts or something.

Read the origional post name again.

I am starting to give evidence that Dick Cheney will soon be showing up and trying to start another war, this time with Iran.

The evidence will continue to mount in the next few weeks.

RichC · #8 02-13-2010, 08:18 AM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125164376287270241.html

WASHINGTON -- Former Vice President Dick Cheney hinted that, in the waning days of the Bush administration, he had pushed for a military strike to destroy Iran's nuclear-weapons program.

Fox News Sunday "I was probably a bigger advocate of military action than any of my colleagues," Dick Cheney said, regarding Iran and its nuclear ambitions.

In an interview on Fox News Sunday, Mr. Cheney described himself as being isolated among advisers to then-President George W. Bush, who ultimately decided against direct military action.
"I was probably a bigger advocate of military action than any of my colleagues," Mr. Cheney said in response to questions about whether the Bush administration should have launched a pre-emptive attack prior to handing over the White House to Barack Obama.

daveuz · #9 02-13-2010, 09:32 AM

In June, Mrs. Palin told ministry students at her former church that in going to war with Iraq, the United States is "on a task that is from God," the Associated Press reported.
Mrs. Palin's brand of evangelical Protestantism is especially well-disposed to the preservation of Israel for biblical reasons, said Merrill Matthews, an evangelical Christian and a Dallas-based health-policy specialist.
Mrs. Palin was baptized as a teenager at the Wasilla Assembly of God Church. She frequently attends the Juneau Christian Center, which is also part of the Pentecostal Assemblies of God. Her home church is the Church of the Rock, an independent congregation.
"Historically, the Assemblies of God have been dispensationalists, which means they believe in 'the rapture' of Christians that takes them out of the world," said Mr. Matthews. "Central to that position is a very strong support for Israel. It's integral to their view of both prophecy and politics. Denying Israel is almost like denying the faith." http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/04/palins-evangelical-faith-drives-pro-israel-view/

MS Fowler · #10 02-13-2010, 09:46 AM

AFAIK, neither Mr. Chaney, nor MRS. Palin currently hold no elective office. They have no power, other than the power of persuasion, to effect any US policy.

Lets worry about the sun burning out in another couple of billion years, instead.

dynalow · #11 02-13-2010, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

AFAIK, neither Mr. Chaney, nor MRS. Palin currently hold no elective office. They have no power, other than the power of persuasion, to effect any US policy.

Lets worry about the sun burning out in another couple of billion years, instead.

Don't you see? Somethings happening here.

Maybe Cheney's going duck hunting somewhere in Texas this weekend.

There's something happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away

Dick Cheney ---> da man wid da gun.

daveuz · #12 02-13-2010, 10:30 AM

Palin excoriated Obama on his handling of US foreign policy. Among other things, she noted that a year into his quest to appease dictators, America’s international standing is in shambles. “Israel, a friend and a critical ally, now questions the strength of our support,” she added.

Palin bellowed that on issues of foreign policy, there is no room for self-delusion. As she put it, “National security, that’s the one place where you’ve got to call it like it is.” And then, “We need a foreign policy that distinguishes America’s friends from her enemies and recognizes the true nature of the threats that we face.”

If her address wasn’t enough to convince Americans – and specifically American Jews – that Palin thinks supporting Israel and standing up to Iran are the keys to US national security, then there was her interview on Fox News Sunday. Asked how Obama can win reelection in 2012, Palin responded, “Say he decided to declare war on Iran or decided really to come out and do whatever he could to support Israel, which I would like him to do.”

And if that still isn’t enough, there is her lapel pin. The politician who leads the populist opposition to Obama decided to make her most important speech since the 2008 election wearing a pin featuring the US flag and the Israeli flag.

Palin, who is considering a run in the 2012 Republican presidential primaries, is using her public platforms to reassemble the coalition of security hawks, social conservatives and blue collar workers that propelled Ronald Reagan to the White House in 1980. Her support for Israel serves her in building support among both security hawks and social conservatives.

Unlike Obama’s empty protestations of support for Israel, Palin’s support is obviously heartfelt and therefore will not diminish while Obama remains in office. And as Palin becomes stronger, her ability to influence the US debate in a manner that constrains Obama’s freedom to intimidate Israel into allowing Iran to become a nuclear power will rise.

In spite of Palin’s extraordinary support for Israel, the American Jewish community overwhelmingly rejects her..... http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=168501

Txjake · #13 02-13-2010, 10:40 AM

I dont know about all this Cheney/Palin nonsense, but anyone who does not think that a nuke armed Iran is a problem is living in a dream world. We will have to deal with this now or later. Better now, when they have less capability than when they have enough nukes and delivery systems to rule the Gulf....

RichC · #14 02-13-2010, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

AFAIK, neither Mr. Chaney, nor MRS. Palin currently hold no elective office. They have no power, other than the power of persuasion, to effect any US policy.

Lets worry about the sun burning out in another couple of billion years, instead.

This guy keeps twisting feeble little brains into believing they need to go to war.

For many they will never see the sun again.
Because of one false war sponsored by haliburton, and good old Dick.