-------------------------------------------------------- From: "Janet M Eaton" <•••@••.•••> To: •••@••.••• Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 10:36:19 -0300 Subject: Iran: Next Target .... recent articles & preface - Chossudovsky, Editor (globalresearch.ca) Reply-to: •••@••.••• Assembled from selected articles and essays Iran: Next Target of US Military Aggression (Edited by Professor Michel Chossudovsky) at globalresearch.ca website http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CRG502A.html 1. Some Quotes 2. Most Recent References with URLs 3. Preface by Professor Michel Chossudovsky fyi -janet ----------------------------------------- 1. SOME QUOTES: The Bush administration has officially identified Iran and Syria as the next stage of "the road map to war". Targeting Iran is a bipartisan project, which broadly serves the interests of the Anglo- American oil conglomerates, the Wall Street financial establishment and the military-industrial complex. --- Professor Michel Chossudovsky, May 2005 (See Preface below) Why the big rush? My reliable sources tell me it is because there is a timetable that makes it urgent for Bolton to be ready for action in June in order to cripple the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as part of the plan to bomb the Iranian nuclear-power plant at Bushehr. That's because Bushehr, under construction with Russian supervision, will soon be ready to receive the Russian fissile material enabling it to produce power. In 1981, remember Republican Senators, Israel bombed the Osiraq nuclear power plant near Baghdad just before it was to be fueled by its French contractors. Once fueled, bombing is out of the question because of the radiation that would be emitted, with clouds traveling who knows where. ----- Jude Wanniski, The Bush- Bolton Plan to Bomb Iran's Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant - Memo to Republican Senators May 8, 2005 (See reference below) The United States has long maintained the option of preemptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security. The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction- and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, (…). To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively." (National Security Strategy, White House, 2002, http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html ) To justify pre-emptive military actions, including the use of nuclear weapons in conventional war theaters (approved by the Senate in late 2003), the National Security Doctrine requires the "fabrication" of a terrorist threat, --ie. "an outside enemy." It also needs to link these terrorist threats to "State sponsorship" by the so-called "rogue states" including Iran and Syria. --- Michel Chossudovsky, (Preface below) ============================== 2. SELECTED ARTICLES & ESSAYS http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CRG502A.html Iran: Next Target of US Military Aggression Michel Chossudovsky, Editor PREFACE inserted below * =============================== Most recent articles articles & essays: Revealed: Israel plans strike on Iranian nuclear plant www.globalresearch.ca 18 May 2005 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MAH505A.html Revealed: Israel plans strike on Iranian nuclear plant Uzi Mahnaimi The Times, 15 may 2005 <><><><><><><><><><> The Bush-Bolton Plan to Bomb Iran's Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant by Jude Wanniski Memo on the Margin, www.wanniski.com May 2005 www.globalresearch.ca 8 May 2005 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/505A.html <><><><><><><><><><> Planned US-Israeli Attack on Iran by Michel Chossudovsky www.globalresearch.ca 1 May 2005 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO505A.html <><><><><><><><><><> Sleepwalking to disaster in Iran by Scott Ritter http://www.english.aljazeera.net 30 March 2005 www.globalresearch.ca 31 March 2005 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/RIT503B.html <><><><><><><><><><> The US wants to "set Israel loose" to attack Iran by Uri Avnery GUSH SHALOM 19 February 2005 www.globalresearch.ca 19 February 2005 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/AVN502A.html <><><><><><><><><> US threatens Iran with military strike at its nuclear sites Arab Monitor , 6 February 2005 www.globalresearch.ca 8 February 2005 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/502A.html <><><><><><><><><><> Cheney: Iran at "top of the list" of Trouble Spots, "asks" Israel to carry out the Attack http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CRG501D.html Cheney has advice for Tehran David E. Sanger The New York Times, January 22, 2005 <><><><><><><><><><> Next Target: Iran by Richard M Bennett AFI Research Database on Intelligence, National Security and Defence, January 18 2005 www.globalresearch.ca 19 January 2005 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BEN501A.html <><><><><><><><><><> 3. PREFACE The Bush administration has officially identified Iran and Syria as the next stage of "the road map to war". Targeting Iran is a bipartisan project, which broadly serves the interests of the Anglo-American oil conglomerates, the Wall Street financial establishment and the military-industrial complex. The broader Middle East-Central Asian region encompasses more than 70% of the World's reserves of oil and natural gas. Iraq possesses 11% of the world's oil and ranks only second to Saudi Arabia in the size of its reserves The announcement to target Iran should come as no surprise. Already during the Clinton administration, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) had formulated "in war theater plans" to invade both Iraq and Iran: "The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President's National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman's National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command's theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM's theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States' vital interest in the region - uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil." (USCENTCOM, http://www.milnet.com/milnet/pentagon/centcom/chap1/stratgic.htm#USPol icy , emphasis added) The Project for a New American Century Bush's National Security doctrine contained in the PNAC is a continuation of Clinton's "strategy of containment of rogue states". The PNAC is a neo-conservative think tank linked to the Defense- Intelligence establishment, the Republican Party and the powerful Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) which plays a behind-the-scenes role in the formulation of US foreign policy. The PNAC's declared objectives are: * defend the American homeland; • fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars; • perform the "constabulary" duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions; • transform U.S. forces to exploit the "revolution in military affairs;" Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney had commissioned the PNAC blueprint prior to the 2000 presidential elections. The PNAC outlines a roadmap of conquest. It calls for "the direct imposition of U.S. "forward bases" throughout Central Asia and the Middle East: "with a view to ensuring economic domination of the world, while strangling any potential "rival" or any viable alternative to America's vision of a 'free market' economy" Distinct from theater wars, the so-called "constabulary functions" imply a form of global military policing using various instruments of military intervention including punitive bombings and the sending in of US Special Forces, etc. Constabulary functions are contemplated in the first phase of US actions against Iran. With regard to Syria, already in October 2003, the bombing of presumed ‘terrorist bases' in Syria by the Israeli Air Force was intended to provide a justification for subsequent pre-emptive military interventions. Ariel Sharon launched the attacks with the approval of Donald Rumsfeld. The Pentagon views ‘territorial control' over Syria, which constitutes a land bridge between Israel and occupied Iraq, as ‘strategic' from a military and economic standpoint. This planned extension of the war into Syria and Iran has serious implications. It means that Israel becomes a major military actor in the US-led war, as well as an ‘official' member of the Anglo-American coalition. It also raises the broader issue of nuclear weapons and their use in the Middle East war theater. The US, Britain and Israel already have a coordinated nuclear weapons policy. Meanwhile, Israeli nuclear warheads are pointed at major cities in the Middle East including Tehran and Damascus. The governments of all three countries have stated quite openly that they plan to use nuclear weapons "if they are attacked". The Pre-emptive War Doctrine "Preemptive military action" against Iran, is presented as an act of "self-defense" against two categories of enemies, "rogue States" and "Islamic terrorists": "The war against terrorists of global reach is a global enterprise of uncertain duration. …America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed. The United States has long maintained the option of preemptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security. The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction- and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, (…). To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act preemptively." (National Security Strategy, White House, 2002, http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html ) To justify pre-emptive military actions, including the use of nuclear weapons in conventional war theaters (approved by the Senate in late 2003), the National Security Doctrine requires the "fabrication" of a terrorist threat, --ie. "an outside enemy." It also needs to link these terrorist threats to "State sponsorship" by the so-called "rogue states" including Iran and Syria. -- ============================================================ If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website (http://cyberjournal.org) or try out our low-traffic, moderated email list by sending a message to: •••@••.••• You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website, provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and this disclaimer. Richard Moore (rkm) Wexford, Ireland "Escaping The Matrix - Global Transformation: WHY WE NEED IT, AND HOW WE CAN ACHIEVE IT ", old draft: http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/rkmGlblTrans.html _____________________________ "...the Patriot Act followed 9-11 as smoothly as the suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the Reichstag fire." - Srdja Trifkovic There is not a problem with the system. The system is the problem. Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs. _____________________________ cj list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj newslog list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog _____________________________ Informative links: http://www.indymedia.org/ http://www.globalresearch.ca/ http://www.greenleft.org.au/index.htm http://www.MiddleEast.org http://www.rachel.org http://www.truthout.org http://www.williambowles.info/monthly_index/ http://www.zmag.org http://www.co-intelligence.org ============================================================
