Attacking Iran

The Unz Review — 26 February 2019 — 1600 words

Bombing Iran

Observers of developments in the Middle East have long taken it as a given that the United States and Israel are seeking for an excuse to attack Iran.

The recently terminated conference in Warsaw had that objective, which was clearly expressed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it failed to rally European and Middle Eastern states to support the cause. On the contrary, there was strong sentiment coming from Europe in particular that normalizing relations with Iran within the context of the 2015 multi party nuclear agreement is the preferred way to go both to avoid a major war and to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation.

There are foundations in Washington, all closely linked to Israel and its lobby in the U.S., that are wholly dedicated to making the case for war against Iran. They seek pretexts in various dark corners, including claims that Iran is cheating on its nuclear program, that it is developing ballistic missiles that will enable it to deliver its secret nuclear warheads onto targets in Europe and even the United States, that it is an oppressive, dictatorial government that must be subjected to regime change to liberate the Iranian people and give them democracy, and, most stridently, that is provoking and supporting wars and threats against U.S. allies all throughout the Middle East.

Dissecting the claims about Iran, one might reasonably counter that rigorous inspections by the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirm that Tehran has no nuclear weapons program, a view that is supported by the U.S. intelligence community in its recent Worldwide Threat Assessment.

Beyond that, Iran’s limited missile program can be regarded as largely defensive given the constant threats from Israel and the U.S. and one might well accept that the removal of the Iranian government is a task best suited for the Iranian people, not delivered through military intervention by a foreign power that has been starving the country through economic warfare. And as for provoking wars in the Middle East, look to the United States and Israel, not Iran.

So the hawks in Washington, by which one means National Security Adviser John Bolton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and, apparently President Donald Trump himself when the subject is Iran, have been somewhat frustrated by the lack of a clear casus belli to hang their war on. No doubt prodded by Netanyahu, they have apparently revived an old story to give them what they want, even going so far as to develop an argument that would justify an attack on Iran without a declaration of war while also lacking any imminent threat from Tehran to justify a preemptive strike.

What may be the new Iran policy was recently outlined in a Washington Times article, which unfortunately has received relatively little attention from either the media, the punditry or from the few policymakers themselves who have intermittently been mildly critical of Washington’s propensity to strike first and think about it afterwards.

The article is entitled “Exclusive: Iran-al Qaeda alliance May Provide Legal Rationale for U.S. military strikes.” The article’s main points should be taken seriously by anyone concerned over what is about to unfold in the Persian Gulf because it is not just the usual fluff emanating from the hubris-induced meanderings of some think tank, though it does include some of that. It also cites government officials by name and others who are not named but are clearly in the administration.

As an ex-CIA case officer who worked on the Iran target for a number of years, I was shocked when I read the Times’ article, primarily because it sounded like a repeat of the fabricated intelligence that was used against both Iraq and Iran in 2001 through 2003.

It is based on the premise that war with Iran is desirable for the United States and, acting behind the scenes, Israel, so it is therefore necessary to come up with an excuse to start it.

As the threat of terrorism is always a good tactic to convince the American public that something must be done, that is what the article tries to do and it is particularly discouraging to read as it appears to reflect opinion in the White House.


As I have been writing quite critically about the CIA and the Middle East for a number of years, I am accustomed to considerable push-back from former colleagues. But in this case, the calls and emails I received from former intelligence officers who shared my experience of the Middle East and had read the article went strongly the other way, condemning the use of both fake and contrived intelligence to start another unnecessary war.

The article states that Iran is supporting al Qaeda by providing money, weapons and sanctuary across the Middle East to enable it to undertake new terrorist attacks. It is doing so in spite of ideological differences because of a common enemy: the United States. Per the article and its sources, this connivance has now “evolved into an unacceptable global security threat” with the White House intent on “establishing a potential legal justification for military strikes against Iran or its proxies.”

One might reasonably ask why the United States cares if Iran is helping al Qaeda as both are already enemies who are lying on the Made in U.S.A. chopping block waiting for the ax to fall. The reason lies in the Authorization to Use Military Force, originally drafted post 9/11 to provide a legal fig leaf to pursue al Qaeda worldwide, but since modified to permit also going after “associated groups.”

If Iran is plausibly an associated group then President Trump and his band of self-righteous maniacs egged on by Netanyahu can declare “bombs away Mr. Ayatollah.” And if Israel is involved, there will be a full benediction coming from Congress and the media. So is this administration both capable and willing to start a major war based on bullshit? You betcha!

The Times suggests how it all works as follows: “Congressional and legal sources say the law may now provide a legal rationale for striking Iranian territory or proxies should President Trump decide that Tehran poses a looming threat to the U.S. or Israel and that economic sanctions are not strong enough to neutralize the threat.” The paper does not bother to explain what might constitute a “looming threat” to the United States from puny Iran but it is enough to note that Israel, as usual, is right in the middle of everything and, exercising its option of perpetual victim-hood, it is apparently threatened in spite of its nuclear arsenal and overwhelming regional military superiority guaranteed by act of the U.S. Congress.

Curiously, though several cited administration officials wedded to the hard-line against Iran because it is alleged to be the “world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism” were willing to provide their opinions on the Iran-al Qaeda axis, the authors of the recent Worldwide Threat Assessment issued by the intelligence community apparently have never heard of it. The State Department meanwhile sees an Iranian pipeline moving al Qaeda’s men and money to targets in central and south Asia, though that assessment hardly jives with the fact that the only recent major attack attributed to al Qaeda was carried out on February 13th in southeastern Iran against the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, a bombing that killed 27 guardsmen.

The State annual threat assessment also particularly condemns Iran for funding groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which are, not coincidentally, enemies of Israel who would care less about “threatening” the United States but for the fact that it is constantly meddling in the Middle East on behalf of the Jewish state.

And when in doubt, the authors of the article went to “old reliable,” the leading neocon think tank the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which, by the way, works closely with the Israeli government and never, ever has criticized the state of democracy in Israel. One of its spokesmen was quick off the mark: ““The Trump administration is right to focus on Tehran’s full range of malign activities, and that should include a focus on Tehran’s long-standing support for al Qaeda.”

Indeed, the one expert cited in the Times story who actually is an expert and examined original documents rather than reeling off approved government and think tank talking points contradicted the Iran-al Qaeda narrative. “Nelly Lahoud, a former terrorism analyst at the U.S. Military Academy and now a New America Foundation fellow, was one of the first to review documents seized from bin Laden’s hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan. She wrote in an analysis for the Atlantic Council this fall that the bin Laden files revealed a deep strain of skepticism and hostility toward the Iranian regime, mixed with a recognition by al Qaeda leaders of the need to avoid a complete break with Tehran. In none of the documents, which date from 2004 to just days before bin Laden’s death, ‘did I find references pointing to collaboration between al Qaeda and Iran to carry out terrorism,’ she concluded.”

So going after Iran is the name of the game even if the al Qaeda story is basically untrue.

The stakes are high and whatever has to be produced, deduced or fabricated to justify a war is fair game. Iran and terrorism? Perfect. Let’s try that one out because, after all, invading Iran will be a cakewalk and the people will be in the streets cheering our tanks as they roll by. What could possibly go wrong?



Sourced from the Unz Review
via Truthseeker

20 thoughts to “Attacking Iran”

  1. War with Iran would mean that oil shipments from the Middle East going thru the Persian Gulf/Strait of Hormuz will be very effectively hindered, maybe even halted 100%. Maybe they “have to” takeover Venezuela before they start a war with Iran so they’ll have a source of oil when the Persian Gulf/Strait of Hormuz is closed — because war with Iran definitely means the Persian Gulf/Strait of Hormuz will be closed to oil tankers and oil shipments to countries all around the world will be greatly greatly reduced. Venezuela has alot of oil. If they takeover Venezuela then they can start a war with Iran and it wouldn’t matter if the Iranians close the Persian Gulf/Strait of Hormuz.

    whiddlejoew tries his hand at Geo-Politics. How am I doing , Pat?


    Pat, they say the big time bookies in Vegas are betting on Trump to win in 2020. What’s your opinion, Pat, about the big time Vegas bookies betting on Trump to win in 2020? Do you want your girlfriend Hellary to run again for the presidency? Or, are you over her and now you got a new girlfriend and you want your new girlfriend Kamala Harris to run for ~ and ¡WIN! ~ The Presidency in 2020!

    1. Trump will be picked in the CFR’s “2020 (S)election!!!” easily. He could not have picked better idiots to oppose him if he paid $$$Billions…. which he might have done. 🙂

      He’s Israel’s boy!!! 🙂 🙂

      1. Pat
        You mean to tell me Pocahontas has no shot at overhauling the Trumpmeister?🤡
        Say it ain’t so!😱

    2. Joe, last I checked the US is #1 oil producer.
      Of course for decades it’s been Saudi Arabia, Russia, USA all jockeying positions, 1, 2, 3, all within small margins of each other. Exactly as planned.
      In other words the US, Saudi Arabia and Russia all are basically #1 oil pumpers.

      1. I was given to believe that the US got most of its oil from Canada not the ME…..however, Venezuela oil is thicker, richer and a far higher quality….hence the [unhealthy] interest.

    3. TROJ –

      I have to wonder what dirt on Hillary’s campaign was discussed/revealed by Cohen in the SECRET hearing yesterday. Dems are in charge of the House protocols now. They can pick and choose when to hide themselves in SECRET.😕

  2. Trump’s warmongering appears to be right on schedule. Note how Jews have ceased screaming “Nadzee! Nadzee!” and are now buddying up to Trump? As Alex Linder said long ago, “Jews set ’em up and Jews knock ’em down.”

    When will the gullible goy wake up to the Trump and Jewdy show whose final season episode will be the Jews’ nuclear annihilation of most, if not all, mankind?

    Start to finish, the atomic bomb was, and is, the Jews’ bomb.

    1. If my theory about orange clown is correct, he’ll forcefully expand the empire for his jewish-supremacist handlers until Russia and/or China stop him. Orange clown may be the last “president” the U.S. will have, IMO.

  3. Oh happy day! The preview post for editing has been resurrected from the sepulcher of the bytes! Thank you, thank you, thank you, Jesus! Or admin; whichever is most applicable.

  4. Wiggins, it’s a bigly rigged world out there.

    See the date of the article (Wednesday, February 27, 2019) and where it’s from?
    Arab News is from Saudi Arabia. It’s not Arutz, Al Jazeera or the NYT.

    “The eternal triangle — Saudi Arabia, Russia and the US — will continue to dominate the global energy business for the foreseeable future”

    CALGARY – Canadian oil imports surged to their highest levels in four years in 2016 as a combination of primarily

    DEFECTIVE LINK DELETED. (I know you’ve embedded it, but it is still defective and damages the formatting of the site.)

    sailed into Eastern Canadian refineries.

  5. Sometimes I wonder things like: What would happen if the Yellowstone supervolcano erupted tomorrow, making 2/3 of America an uninhabitable wasteland. Would team orange clown still be consumed with the idea of destroying Iran and Venezuela?

  6. Well, nobody who has his mind made up waits for an excuse to attack a country they’re sure they can annihilate.. especially not these assholes…
    As they used to say on KSAN – “if you don’t like the news, go out and make some of your own”…
    Apparently there’s a power chess game going on in Intel circles, about who can prevent the ZOG from instigating the next big funk….
    Nobody buys Iran as a nuclear aggressor developing ICBMs or planting bombs is shipping containers, or as trying to destabilize the area so they can expand their borders…
    We all know who that really is….
    Yes Iran supports Hezbollah/Hamas, which is the only thing keeping the Jews out of Lebanon… they want that river…
    Hey, the Jews want peace right..
    Remember the old mad magazine jokes about the Russians. –
    A ‘piece’ of this country and a ‘piece’ of that one…
    The deep state neocon conflict mongers have been macaabre feasting at the PR banquet buffet over the ayatollahs revolt against the Shah pahlavi for a long time. Truth be known zbig and the rest of jimmy carter’s trilateralist bosses might well have plotted all 3 episodes in that F story, mossadegh, the Shah and that scowling mfer who stimulated toilet paper sales, when some entrepreneur put his picture on it… I remember the bumper sticker –
    If you’ve ever read the guy’s book, to me it was like way too many bongloads of kick-ass hashish they got over there… really wacky mumbo jumbo…

  7. 2 rival “gangs”, whose primary heads are elite jew bankers. One “East, one “West”. Both have been angling for world supremacy ever since the radioactive dust settled on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    (((Their))) respective positions have been such that the Zios in the West have had the upper hand and are in an OFFENSIVE mode. This has put whatever “Zio equivalent” in the East in DEFENSIVE postures all this time.

    This in turn would have to feature shifting alliances of the minor players in the ME in keeping with how the geo-political chess match is being played

    1. Does Cohen seem sincere when he makes these statements? He comes across as sincere to me.

      No, Harold, Cohen does not seem sincere. If I am not mistaken, the man pleaded guilty last year to criminal charges including tax evasion, bank fraud and campaign finance violations… sincerely, evidently 🙂

      The reason “he comes across as sincere” to you is quite simple, Harold: What he says fits the pattern that exists in your head about the “orange clown”. That’s all. But that does not make Cohen sincere – the words “Cohen” and “sincere” do not seat very well next to each other.

      Please pay close attention, Harold: I am not saying that the pattern that exists in your head about the “orange clown” is wrong. I am just trying to explain to you why “he comes across as sincere” to you.

      I would not be surprised if Cohen returned in a few days to U.S. lawmakers and told them (just as sincerely, of course) that Trump asked him several times about a proposed skyscraper project in Moscow long after he secured the Republican presidential nomination (as evidence of Trump-Putin collusion).

    2. HS-
      “Does Cohen seem sincere when he makes these statements?”

      Yes!! Definitely!!
      As sincere as he was when he sincerely lied to congress and is going to jail for three years…. so he can sincerely write his $10Million book in peace, and sincerely pose for $100Million movie shoots in jail…. if he sincerely chooses. It will be a sincerely profitable vacation. 🙂

  8. have you ever sincerely looked at the mugshots of the Jesus hating terrorists
    that print the currency and own the media and pay the crack whores in the
    jew worshipping crack house called congress…

    have you ever sincerely asked why do {{{{THEY}}}} have to hate Jesus…

    sincerely look for a Talmudic Jesus hating PHARISEE in the first five books of the Old Testament
    or a hook nosed money changer doing the usury thang…


    curiously, the paradox concerning the nature of objective validity is by design and degree

    a pure language ….need to know

  9. A prominent Iranian human rights lawyer has been sentenced to a total of 38 years in jail and 148 lashes in Tehran, her family say.

    Nasrin Sotoudeh was charged with several national security-related offences, all of which she denies.

    Rights groups strongly criticised the “shocking” sentence against the award-winning human rights activist.

    Ms Sotoudeh is known for representing women who have protested having to wear the headscarf.

    “Nasrin Sotoudeh has dedicated her life to defending women’s rights and speaking out against the death penalty,” Philip Luther from Amnesty International said.

    “It is utterly outrageous that Iran’s authorities are punishing her for her human rights work.”


    1. When iwill amnesty International condemn Israel and ask for a boycot? It never will as it is a jewish organisation.
      Always a double standard because they are the ‘ children of god’ how psychotic such thought.
      Can someone call a medic?

Comments are closed.