Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
A Fun Little Did You Know? About Iran
... that according to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, adding a second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf is not an "escalation," but just a "reminder" to Iran?
... that the definition of escalation is an increase in intensity or magnitude?
... that adding a second aircraft carrier also involves adding a destroyer squadron, as well as attack submarines and ships armed with cruise missiles that can reach Iran?
... that this quite obviously represents an escalation of military force in the Persian Gulf?
... that a second aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf will mean that we have more
aircraft carriers off the coast of Iran than any other country in the
world has in its entire navy, with the exception of Great Britain?
...
that were our intention simply deterrence, one would think a single carrier battle
group, with its compliment of cruise missiles and aircraft, all capable
of reaching Tehran, would be sufficient?
... that thanks to the
"surge" strategy, we currently have at least 250,000 troops and
mercenaries just across the border from Iran?
... that being at war with Iran in November means we can look forward to John McCain in the White House in January?
... that Canada is looking better every day?
Comments (5)
I'm with you except for your second to last point. This is one unique instance where I think people are so tapped out of the conflicts already on the stove that turning up the boilers and adding more pots won't necessarily lead them to marching lock-step toward "more of the same".
April 30, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for writing about this. I've been very concerned with the escalation.
April 30, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
As Ronald Reagan once "joked",
"We begin bombing in five minutes."
April 30, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
From an April 12th Washington Post article:
(George Bush) reaffirmed that he has no desire to go to war with Tehran. Saying that his job is to "solve these issues diplomatically," Bush suggested heightened interest in reaching a solution with other countries. "You can't solve these problems unilaterally. You're going to need a multilateral forum."
How diplomatic is it to have Navy destroyers, and more aircraft carriers off the coast of Iran than anywhere else?
An attack on Iran will have even more tragic consequences than the invasion of Iraq.
Regarding the election, I think Cheney is moving forward now on this because he doesn't believe McCain will win.
"Evidence" of Syria's alleged "nuclear facility" was untrue. So too were the reports that Iranian speedboats threatened to blow up an encroaching Naval destroyer in January. So too were the reports that Iran has an active nuclear weapons program. And the reports that Iran had stored weapons caches in Iraq.
What is true, however, is that any country that begins to trade oil for euros instead of dollars is doomed. The invasion of Iraq is one example. The assassination attempt on Hugo Chavez in Venezuala is another. Iran opened its oil exchange two months ago.
It is now completely surrounded by the U.S. military.
After eight years of this, impeachment is still off the table.
Why?
April 30, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's no coincidence that Iran, in fact, just announced today that it will no longer trade oil for dollars. It will only trade oil for euros.
http://www.peakoil.com/article37985.html
This and the U.S. military buildup in the Persian Gulf are directly related.
We are there to protect Saudi Arabia's interests in the region.
We are also there to protect Israel.
And yes, I believe it is in that order.
April 30, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment