Iranian Mullahs punishment is fast approaching

[Christians4LessGvt]

my prediction:
Israel will play lead in first attack on Iran to shield President Bush from US Congressional Whackjobs.
Iran will attempt to respond and make the mistake of attacking US Troops/US Warships/US Allies
That will open the door for President Bush to give green light to US aerial bombardment of Iran
and the hard core democrats "crying" in Congress will be greatly weakened/silenced because of
public sentiment over Iran "attacking the US Military".


Olmert sounds alarm: Iran has crossed red line for developing a nuclear weapon.
It's too late for sanctions

October 22, 2007, 2:18 PM (GMT+02:00)

This is the message prime minister Ehud Olmert is carrying urgently to French President Nicolas Sarkozy Monday and British premier Gordon Brown Tuesday, according to military and intelligence sources.

Last week, Olmert placed the Israeli intelligence warning of an Iranian nuclear breakthrough before Russian president Vladimir Putin, while Israel's defense minister Ehud Barak presented the updated intelligence on the advances Iran has made towards its goal of a nuclear weapon to American officials in Washington, including President Bush.

Olmert will be telling Sarkozy and Brown that the moment for diplomacy or even tough sanctions has passed. Iran can only be stopped now from going all the way to its goal by direct, military action.

Information of the Iranian breakthrough prompted the latest spate of hard-hitting US statements. Sunday, Oct. 21, US vice president Cheney said: "Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions.''

Friday, the incoming Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen said US forces are capable of operations against Iran's nuclear facilities or other targets. At his first news conference, he said: "I don't think we're stretched in that regard."

It is worth noting that whereas Olmert's visits are officially tagged as part of Israel's campaign for harsher sanctions against Iran, his trips are devoted to preaching to the converted, leaders who advocate tough measures including a military option; he has avoided government heads who need persuading, like German Chancellor Angela Merkel or Italian prime minister Romano Prodi.

The Israeli prime minister hurried over to Moscow last Thursday after he was briefed on the hard words exchanged between Putin and Iran's supreme ruler Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran Tuesday, Oct. 16.

According to sources, the Russian leader warned the ayatollah that the latest development in Iran's nuclear program prevented him from protecting Tehran from international penalties any longer; the clerical regime?s options were now reduced, he said, to halting its clandestine nuclear activities or else facing tough sanctions, or even military action.

The Russian ruler's private tone of speech was in flat contrast to his public denial of knowledge of Iranian work on a nuclear weapon. It convinced Olmert to include Moscow in his European itinerary.

Sources in Iran and Moscow report that Putin's dressing-down of Khamenei followed by his three-hour conversation with the Israeli prime minister acted as catalysts for Iranian hardliners's abrupt action in sweeping aside senior nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani Saturday, Oct. 20 and the Revolutionary Guards General Mahmoud Chaharbaghi?s threat to fire 11,000 rockets and mortars at enemy targets the minute after Iran comes under attack.

Military sources say Tehran could not manage to shoot off this number of projectiles on its own. Iran would have to co-opt allies and surrogates, Syria, Hizballah, Hamas and pro-Tehran militias in Iraq to the assault.

US military sources disclosed previously that if, as widely reported, Syria is in the process of building a small reactor capable of producing plutonium on the North Korean model, Iran must certainly have acquired one of these reactors before Syria, and would then be in a more advanced stage of plutonium production at a secret underground location.

[source:e-mail]
 

[Xavier_Onassis]

Olmert would probably say this no matter what the facts were. He is hugely unpopular at home and needs to get the [people to rally around something other than disposing of him. Israel tends to lie A LOT about all the stuff that threatens them. It's how they extort such a large amount of foreign aid from the US.

If Junorbush starts a war with Iran and it goes as horribly as his Iraq debacle, not only will people loathe him even more, it is probable that they also, finally, will start clamoring for ignoring Israel all the time.

Israel is a drain on the US, not an asset. They may need the US, but the US does not need them. We can get all the necessary NY taxi drivers from Third World countries.
 

[Michael Tee]

<<my prediction:
<<Israel will play lead in first attack on Iran to shield President Bush from US Congressional Whackjobs.
Iran will attempt to respond and make the mistake of attacking US Troops/US Warships/US Allies
That will open the door for President Bush to give green light to US aerial bombardment of Iran
and the hard core democrats "crying" in Congress will be greatly weakened/silenced because of
public sentiment over Iran "attacking the US Military".>>

My compliments to you, CU4, for the boldness of your prediction.  I admire anyone who sticks his neck out like that.

My first reaction to reading the first para of your post was, "What does he think the Russians are going to do about this after first warning the world [i.e. the U.S.A.] against the use of force in their backyard?" but then I saw that the source you were quoting from had actually dealt with the problem this way: by acknowledging the public expressions of support made by Moscow in favour of Teheran, and then undercutting them completely by claiming that according to un-named "sources," Putin had told Ayatollah Khamenei the exact opposite in private.  The crux of the "don't worry bout Russia" argument is "Never mind what he says in public, we know he says the opposite in private.  How do we know?  Sources."

I'd feel a little more confidence in this story if it came from a reputable reporter like Sy Hersh, but your link (a) did not work and (b) seems to indicate a private e-mail.  Is this correct?  This is some private e-mailer or blogger?  And how would he or she happen to know what was said in private between Khamenei and Putin?

You know what this really sounds like?  Israeli disinformation.  To what purpose, I'm not sure.  Possibly to get the American doltocracy used to thinking about the Iran war as if it were a fait accompli, possibly to soften the ground for seeding the idea later that an Israeli strike on Iran has U.S. approval regardless of any "official" U.S. denunciations that may follow it.

[Stray Pooch]

Putin had told Ayatollah Khamenei the exact opposite in private.  The crux of the "don't worry bout Russia" argument is "Never mind what he says in public, we know he says the opposite in private.  How do we know?  Sources."

Yet it is not uncommon practice to do just that - especially when dealing with Middle Eastern culture, where saving face is incredibly important.  Putin could well be treading a thin line, and if this story is true it is both hopeful and shows that Putin is even smarter than I thought.  Mind you, I also think he is evil and rather dangerous, but not stupid.  If Putin is trying to avoid giving the US too much leeway but also recognizes the inheremt danger in a nuclear Iran speaking out of both sides of his mouth could be a perfectly logical, and even ethical (from at least his perspective) compromise.

[Michael Tee]

<<Yet it is not uncommon practice to do just that - especially when dealing with Middle Eastern culture, where saving face is incredibly important.  Putin could well be treading a thin line, and if this story is true it is both hopeful and shows that Putin is even smarter than I thought.  Mind you, I also think he is evil and rather dangerous, but not stupid.  If Putin is trying to avoid giving the US too much leeway but also recognizes the inheremt danger in a nuclear Iran speaking out of both sides of his mouth could be a perfectly logical, and even ethical (from at least his perspective) compromise.>>

I didn't say it was impossible for Putin to turn around 180 degrees in his private statements, but this particular post was not sourced in any way that I could recognize.  Funny that the MSM couldn't pick up the story, despite the alleged sources in BOTH Moscow and Teheran, but some unnamed blogger has it.  THAT is suspicious, and it does sound like more Israeli disinformation.

[Christians4LessGvt]

Bush and Putin Rough out Breakthrough Strategic Deal for Dumping Iran

Oct23,2007

The first hint that a strategic deal was brewing was dropped by Russian President Vladimir Putin. At a news conference in Tehran last week, he alluded to a shift in the controversy with Washington which might settle his dispute with President George W. Bush on the US missile shield in East Europe.

His comment went largely unnoticed - except by officials in Tehran, who noted his reference to a possible understanding with the Americans though not with Iran.

Then, on Monday, Oct. 22, Bush and Putin talked at length on the phone and made further progress towards an understanding.

The outline of the American role in the deal surfaced in Prague Tuesday, Oct. 23, when US secretary of defense Robert Gates suggested a possible delay in activating the proposed US missile interceptor project in Poland and radar station in the Czech Republic - until an Iranian threat was "definitely proved."

Gates articulated this concession for allaying Moscow's strong opposition after he held talks with Czech prime minister Mirek Topolanek. Gates added that the US would proceed with plans to build the sites, but possibly wait before putting them in working order.

"We would consider tying together activation of the sites in Poland and the Czech Republic with definitive proof of the threat, in other words, Iranian missile testing and so on," Gates said.

The proposal has already been presented to the Russians who have expressed interest. Gates described a related proposal that might mean permitting a Russian presence at US missile defense bases, including at the Polish and Czech sites.

US president George Bush spoke a short while later at the National Defense University in Washington. He said the US-led missile defense system in Europe is urgent, but spoke positively about Putin's offer of missile defense facilities in Azerbaijan and southern Russia. The entire project, said the US president, is "part of a broader effort to move beyond the Cold War" that could lead to "an unprecedented level of strategic cooperation" between Russia and the United States. He referred to Iran as "an emerging threat that affects us all."

The Pentagon wants to install 10 interceptor rockets in Poland, linked to tracking radar in the Czech Republic and to other elements of the missile defense system based in the United States.

Bush's words and the plan outlined by Gates represent a major US concession to Russia and a triumph for Putin's dogged opposition to the deployment of US missile defense bases in two former Warsaw Treaty nations. The Bush administration can also congratulate itself on bringing the Russian leader round to admitting that Iranian missiles are a threat to Europe; its corollary - the Islamic Republic's nuclear program is a threat to the world.

As long as the deal is not wrapped up between the two world readers, Washington and Moscow sources say these key questions remain open:

How far will Putin go in his support for an American clampdown on Iran? Will tough sanctions by the UN Security Council and the world community be his limit? And what if Iran continues to defiantly press ahead with its nuclear weapons program in the face of a military showdown with the United States? Will Russia then look away?

The Bush-Putin deal is still in the making. Some answers may be forthcoming in the weeks ahead.

[source:e-mail]

[Michael Tee]

Same problem with this as with the previous post - - sourcing.

Even assuming a legitimate source, I see some very unlikely elements:

<<The outline of the American role in the deal . . . suggested a possible delay in activating the proposed US missile interceptor project in Poland and radar station in the Czech Republic - until an Iranian threat was "definitely proved."

<<Gates . . .  added that the US would proceed with plans to build the sites, but possibly wait before putting them in working order.>>

IN other words, no concessions till the last minute - - the entire project is built, and only the "activation" [whatever the hell THAT means - - probably like "torture," means whatever the "President" says it means] or the very final stage of the project is put on hold.

I'm gonna build a whole series of nuclear cannon on your border; all pointed at various population centres of yours, all loaded with deadly nuclear warheads; but as a "major concession" to you, I tell ya what I'll do; I won't put the batteries in the guidance systems, so you can sleep easy at night.

If the Russians accept this as a "major concession," they would have to be dumber than I thought; not two or three times dumber, but two or three THOUSAND times dumber.