Iran to be US next target: CIA Report
Sat Mar 29 13:18:15 2003
Iran to be US next target: CIA Report
Monday March 24, 2003 (0214 PST)
LAHORE, March 24 (Online): The next target of US after capturing Iraq will be replacement of religious government in Iran with a secular government as the US forces in Afghanistan have already started implementation on action plan in this regard.
According to reliable sources, US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had submitted a detailed 300 pages long report to President George Bush in which it was pointed out that during possible US attack on Iran religiously motivated Jehadi (holy warrior) organizations would support Iran from the border areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Following this report US intelligence agencies have started actions to check any possibility of provision of support to Iran from border areas of the two neighbouring countries by organizations like Tehreek Nifaz Shariat Mohammadi and tribal leaders in Pakistan and Hizb-e-Islami of Eng. Gulbadeen Hikmatyar along with supporters of former Taliban regime in Afghanistan.
Sources further revealed that operation being conducted by U.S. forces in Afghanistan on March 20 was not against Al-Qaeda rather it was against Hizb-e-Islami and possible supporters of Iran.
US intelligence agencies have also informed the US State Department about the names of organizations in Pakistan and Afghanistan which could support Iran during any possible US attack and this list include names of about six organizations.
Sources also revealed that list of countries where replacement of government has been declared essential included Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Cuba and North Korea and from this list Taliban regime has been replaced in Afghanistan while war against Iraq is going on.
Moreover, those 22 countries which are being declared threat to U.S. security could face similar US action like in Iraq if they failed to ensure disarming of their armed organizations and finishing their nuclear arsenal.
The United States targets Iraq first - then Iran
Tue Mar 25 17:37:03 2003
AFI RESEARCH INTELL.BRIEFING
War Briefing - 25th March 2003
The United States targets Iraq first - then Iran
Even while Iraqi resistance continues to stiffen as the US and British forces push their way through the outer defences to the east near Al Kut, the main central advance around Karbala and a significant advance towards Habbaniya from Jordan, the true strategic target of the Allies is becoming clearer; the Islamic Republic of Iran. The likely future military dispositions inside an occupied Iraq will undoubtedly threaten Syria, but will primarily be designed to provide a significantly launch pad for the future War on Iran. They will also importantly complete the ring of steel now being created around the Tehran regime. The military facilities and major airbases being built in the former Soviet Central Asian Republics and in Afghanistan to the north of Iran; and those already in place in Oman, Qatar, Bahrain and Kuwait to the south will be significantly strengthened by the presence of additional major airfields and of large ground forces to the west in Iraq with its long border made up largely of good terrain for highly mobile mechanized warfare.
The authors of A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm include some of those most associated with the new 'Crusaders' in the US administration, notably the right wing hawks Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, clearly identify the real American target. In their view Iran is 'American territory' and ever since the British and Americans organized the coup that overthrew the legitimate Government in 1953 and restored a medieval style potentate in the form of the Shah to oversee the affairs of an oil rich Iran this view has largely held sway inside Washington. Iraq is a necessary first step to restoring Western control over the entire Gulf region with its vital natural resources and important international waterways. It will also, as with Iraq, be a distinct and bloody form of pay back. In this case for the humiliation of the US Embassy hostages; the failed desert rescue mission; Iran's continuing attempts to control the Straits of Hormuz used by the worlds biggest supertankers; the probable Iranian responsibility for the destruction of PanAm Flight-103 over Lockerbie in 1988 and even the suggestion that Hezbollah were involved in the terrorist outrages of 9-11.
Oil and the economy - the catalysts for future war
The main geo-strategic reasons behind the War of 2003 against Iraq and the rumoured Pentagons plans for a War against Iran in 2004 are the same as the 1950's; oil and economic concerns. The United States economy controls half the worlds wealth, consumes roughly 30% of the world's energy production when measured in British Thermal Units and yet has only 5% of the total population. As long ago as 1948 George Kennan argued that America's duty was "to devise a series of relationships which permit us to maintain this position of disparity. To do so we have to dispense with sentimentality...we should cease thinking about human rights, the raising of living standards and democratization". France, Britain and more recently the United States have followed that advice for the best part of 50 years and with their Turkish and Israel allies have attempted to dragoon the Arab states into line with a mixture of aid, diplomacy and threat. The advances in military technology and the collapse of the Soviet Union have now given the United States a huge window of opportunity which the new and more adventurist leadership in The Whitehouse is determined to exploit. The policies now been followed were first quietly put forward during the Reagan administration and have been honed and perfected through the 1991 Gulf War and Afghanistan.
Warfighting as an adjunct to foreign policy and as an acceptable alternative to diplomacy and international agreement has been firmly established. New and original tactics have been developed by the Pentagon based on a worldwide reach, speed, near total battlefield dominance, advanced technology, the growth of Special Forces and the use of strategic surprise. Traditional military thinking has been replaced by a willingness to do the unexpected, keeping the enemy constantly on the defensive and the use of 'Shock and Awe'. While Iraq is to be the testing ground for the new warfare, Iran will see it come of age. British troops in southern Iraq are already being deployed to seal the border with Iran and the US has penetrated Iranian airspace with impunity on a number occasions since March 21st. 'Stray' cruise missiles and smart bombs are reported to have damaged oil facilities near Khorramshahr, Abadan and Manyuhi, while heavily armed British and US attack aircraft are believed to have circled over the Arvand-Kenar area in Iran on their way into Iraq.
Operation Iranian Freedom - has it already started?
It is reported by sources within Israel and the US intelligence community that a enormous covert operation will be launched by the middle of 2003 to destabilize the Tehran regime. Washington and London are expected to develop a global disinformation campaign aimed at swinging national and international opinion against Iran in anticipation of a full scale invasion by mid to late 2004. It has been claimed that the CIA in particular is already deeply involved in Iran and that Delta Force, the SAS and Australian SAS have been conducting deep penetration operations from Afghanistan. While the USN SEAL's and the Royal Marines SBS have carried out numerous sea borne intelligence operations along Iran's coastline and islands in the Gulf from bases in Bahrain and Oman and indeed from US surface vessels and submarines. According to Gulf intelligence sources USN Special Forces using stealth helicopters and fast raiding craft have apparently carried out considerable surveillance of Bandar-e-Abbas and other important Iranian naval facilities and coast defences. There can be little doubt now that the current operations against Iraq should be seen in the context of establishing the strategic positioning for the next major conflict in the Middle East. Pentagon planners are reported to have apparently based their strategy on the assumption that North Korea can be kept on ice until Iraq and then Iran have been fully dealt with. Whether the regimes in Tehran and Pyongyang will prove quite so willing to go along with Washington's timetable is of course another matter, as is whether anyone and that includes Tony Blair, will be able to reign in America's new military interventionist policies in the future.
Richard M. Bennett
firstname.lastname@example.org Tel/Fax: +44 (0) 1626 33 50 40
New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com/ Iraq's only the start -
Syria & Iran are next
Wednesday, April 2nd, 2003
Soon - my guess is within a matter of weeks - the Battle of Iraq will be over. Battle, not war. The American defeat of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein can only be understood as an early engagement in a much broader war against the Islamic axis.
This war began in Afghanistan against Al Qaeda and the Taliban regime. Then it moved on to Iraq, in the same way World War II flowed to Italy from North Africa. But it won't end in Iraq. Baghdad isn't Berlin. The fall of Saddam won't be the end of armed Arab and Islamic fascism any more than the fall of Benito Mussolini brought the defeat of European fascism.
When Saddam goes, American forces will be sandwiched between two enemies. To the east, Iran, a charter member of the Axis of Evil. To the west, Syria, a new volunteer. Both will have to be defeated before this war is over.
On Monday, according to an official Syrian newspaper (there is no other kind), the regime of Bashar Assad raised its hand for next by announcing its decision "to stand by the Iraqi people, who are facing an illegitimate and unjustified invasion."
Assad was pushed into this decision by the Bush doctrine of "for us or against us." Assad can't be for America because his Baathist colleagues would promptly cut off his head. And so he's against. That explains why Syria has recently opened its border to Saddamite recruits heading for the front and why it has been acting as a conduit for Iraqi military resupply.
Syria is an inviting target for the U.S. Taking down the Assad government would rid the Middle East of an aggressive, anti-American fascist regime and also end Syria's occupation of Lebanon. That, in turn, would enable American forces to go after Hezbollah camps in the Bekaa Valley, just as they went after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Not only would that weaken international terrorism, but the U.S. hasn't forgotten that it was Hezbollah that murdered 241 American Marines in Beirut in 1983.
On Monday, Secretary of State Powell took a step toward the Battle of Syria by warning that the Damascus government "bears the responsibility for its choices and for the consequences." The word "consequences" wasn't accidental. It also appears in UN Resolution 1441 as a euphemism for military action.
Still, Assad could get a temporary reprieve. If he does, it will be thanks to Iran. This week, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice publicly called attention to the advanced state of Tehran's nuclear weapons program. Undersecretary of State John Bolton underscored the point, categorizing the Iranian effort as "of equal import" to the North Korean armament push.
If Iran is really as far along as North Korea, there could be nukes in the hands of the ayatollahs within a matter of months - with hundreds of thousands of American and allied troops next door in Iraq. The U.S. has been waiting for the Tehran theocracy to fall of its own internal unpopularity, but American planners can't exercise such patience with a soon-to-be-atomic Iran.
Anyone hoping for an April V-Iraq extravaganza will be disappointed. Beyond Baghdad, the Battle of Iran lies ahead - and the Battle of Syria and Lebanon. Fortunately, these axis dictatorships aren't (currently) more militarily formidable than Iraq. They will fall as Saddam is falling. Only when they are gone will Fifth Ave. be ready for a victory parade.
Disturbing images of American Soldiers killed in Iraq - Warning - Graphical!
Monday March 24, 2003 (1845 PST)
Is the war against Iraq legal?
IMG FROM SPACK - WOW!
Back to Iraq War Page
American Patriot Friends Network
"...a network of net workers..."
APFN IS NOT A BUSINESS
APFN IS SUPPORTED BY "FREE WILL" GIFT/DONATIONS
Without Justice, there is JUST_US!
APFN Contents Page
APFN Home Page
Last updated 09/21/2010