“IAEA Head: Iran Close To Enriching Uranium”

 

By Dafna Linzer

Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 24, 2006; Page A04

“Iran has taken another step in its ability to enrich uranium, the head of the U.N. atomic energy agency confirmed yesterday, as the Bush administration and European allies failed to reach agreement on sanctions against Tehran’s expanding nuclear program.”

Battle phase deaths in Iraq were 200, occupation deaths are 70 per month. The two drivers of occupation deaths in Iraq are foreign Sunni Arab fighters that Iranians wont take in, and the historic Sunni Shiite rivalry for control of Iraq, which by definition is not part of Irans history. The US lost 50,000 killed in Vietnam and Korea.

While the US loses 200 killed in a war is the time to fight wars, not when it loses 50,000 or more. We are finding that in Korea. The US should just roll over Iran without waiting at all. The same applies to other countries that support terror.

The time to fight wars is when we lose 200 killed per war, not when they have more modern technology like we do and we lose 50,000, or in in nuclear war hundreds of thousands or millions.

By OldAtlantic | Oct 24, 2006 7:50:26 AM

Comments at WaPo

Moves toward War with Iran: Part 2
By William R. Polk
The above article disscusses Iran options, assuming some action has been decided on which is the author’s contention in Part 1. The author relays Richard Armitage as stating aerial attack on Iran by itself can’t work. It references other unnamed sources in the Air Force as saying the same thing.

We comment below.

The army to invade Iran with is in Iraq. We will save deaths in Iraq by invading Iran two ways, one we save the 70 occupation deaths a month in Iraq, and two we stop the support of violence out of Iran to Iraq and possibly Afghanistan. We thus help our effort in Afghanistan.

The only way to revive our situation in Afghanistan may be to invade Iran so we can unite our armies on the Pakistan border and pressure Pakistan to give up its nukes and support of the Taliban.

“ The Iranian leadership, I have been authoritatively told, believes all this is a bluff. ” See Polk above. So does Pakistan’s leadership. That’s why both have ceaselessly worked against us as hard and as fast as they can. They want to build up now while Bush dithers. They think he lacks the will to act. His failure to rebuild the military after 9-11 to the 1991 level, still an all volunteer force, is part of what makes them have disdain for Bush.

Joseph Cirincione, Fool Me Twice

America Moves Toward War with Iran: Part 1
By William R. Polk

“… there is at least a 10% chance of an American attack on Iran before the November 7 Congressional elections and about a 90% chance before the administration’s end in 2008″

Gross stupidity in Afghanistan
By Ajai Sahni

Mr. Sahni’s point is that we are losing in Afghanistan, and the name of our problem is Pakistan. To stop the pain, we have to stop Pakistan. That takes an army on Pakistan’s border. Our army is in Iraq, and Bush is to cheap to build us another one. Because of his father’s no new taxes pledge breaking and loss in 1992, Bush wouldn’t rebuild our forces after 9-11 to the level of 1991. Even the Afghanistan mission as our sole effort would have benefited from that rebuilding, especially if we dealt with Pakistan and its role in terrorism and spreading nuclear weapons.

===

“Independent Voters Favor Democrats by 2 to 1 in Poll
Iraq War Cited Most Often As Top Issue for Elections”

By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, October 24, 2006; Page A01

Comments WaPo

Bush has no plan for people to believe in. His plan in Iraq and Afghanistan is 70 Americans killer per month forever. That is not a plan to believe in. Defeating Iran, rebuilding our army, surrounding Pakistan to make it give up its nukes and bin Laden and link to our troops in Afghanistan is a plan. This has meaning. Bush needs to understand that pictures from Iraq have a meaning of no plan by him. Bush has to have a plan that makes sense, a step by step process that gets us somewhere. Without a plan that makes sense, people have nothing to vote for. Bush only offers death. People vote against just dying.

Bush has to have a strategy that gets us step by step from where we are to victory over what attacked us and what threatens us.   He, like Blair, doesn’t have that.  Bush and Blair offer eventual defeat of the West through immigration, and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan in the meantime as their plan.  This is death and defeat.  The Bush Blair program is the death and defeat of the West.  They offer death up front in side show wars instead of going after the source, Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Going after these 3 source countries of what attacked us and threatens us would be wildly popular.  Everyone knows that Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia are the real sources of what attacked us and what threatens us.  So to invade them would be wildly popular.   That means defeating our real enemies, who hate us.

 

This article is opinion, hypothesis or speculation. All other disclaimers apply.