Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Where will it end?

  1. Jan 17, 2005 #1
    This is from an article in The New Yorker by award winning reporter, Seymour Hersh:

    "Report: U.S. conducting secret missions in Iran. New Yorker article says
    U.S. commandos in place in 10 Middle East nations.

    ...One former high-level intelligence official told The New Yorker, “This is a war against terrorism, and Iraq is just one campaign. The Bush administration is looking at this as a huge war zone. Next, we’re going to have the Iranian campaign.”

  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 17, 2005 #2
  4. Jan 17, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Two reports of one ststement, accusing Hersh of using "rumor, innuendo and conspiracy theories".

    If you read Hersh's article, you saw that his sources were mostly in the CIA. Much of the report was about how the CIA is being gutted by the Bush administration to be replaced with Defense Department spooks who, unlike the CIA, are not legally required to report to Congress. I didn't see this being denied. He also said that the Bush team regards the election as a successful plebiscite on their methods. This claim was validated by the President saying almost that very thing in answering a question yesterday.

    Of course the government denied that they have active military spies inside Iran, looking for nuclear sites to possibly attack, or that they have various plans for prosecuting a war with Iran if necessary. What would you expect? Those things go without saying; you wanna bet France doesn't have some of that going on too?

    The real meat in the article is also the most unprovable; that our ol' pals the neocons are champin' at the bit and with the boost from the election they could bring the country into a shooting war with Iran. Notice that by chance or otherwise we now command territory on both sides of Iran. No more Marine raids froom the Persian Gulf!
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2005
  5. Jan 17, 2005 #4
    You are giving FAR TOO MUCH credit to the military fiasco instigated by these graduates(or dare I say flunkies?) of the Nixon School of Politics!

    Let's see, Afghanistan is a mess and pumping out more herion than ever, unless that was an intent. Iraq is on the verge of a civil war and I have doubts about the 'elections'. I guess the only means of 'command' that is established is that operations can be based in these territories without negotiations or diplomacy.

    BTW, here is the 'official' DoD attempt to discredit Hersch:


    I really don't see how they plan to pull off an invasion of Iran and/or Syria without a draft. Plus I dont see a public supported draft happening without there being another 'Pearl Harbor' like event, ie 9-11. I think it would have to be pretty devastating considering that 9-11 did not garner the wide support they had hoped for to invade Iraq. But then again, I would not put anything past this crew in power, they know no limits! :uhh:

    #42, I dont think it will end until this crew is taken out of power or they end up breaking the current system. Either way it does not look good. :frown:
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2017
  6. Jan 17, 2005 #5


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    We have spies? Naaa....
  7. Jan 17, 2005 #6
    So are you going to sign up Russ?

    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/nm/20050118/pl_nm/iran_usa_dc [Broken]

    Gee, doesn't that sound familiar?

    So who wants to start a betting pool?

    I am thinking within 3 months action will be emminet since Jr. has a 'mandate' and all plus they dont want to waste any time.

    Any takers?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  8. Jan 17, 2005 #7


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Wouldn't it be foolish to rule out the possibility of military action ? The threat of military action serves well to keep errant governments in check. The possibility of war is something you want the Ayatollah to have to worry about, every time he overreaches.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  9. Jan 17, 2005 #8
    da soona da betta
  10. Jan 17, 2005 #9
    I think now they would be in a rapid preperation mode for an invasion. It seems to me that this would be a message indicating that action is going to be taken. How else would it be interpreted? It is obvious that the administration does not do diplomacy.

    If I were them I would withdraw from the non-proliferation treaty and acquire nukes ASAP. Maybe then there would be a chance for negotiations.
  11. Jan 17, 2005 #10
    So when are you signing up?
  12. Jan 18, 2005 #11
    You mean when did I sign up?
  13. Jan 18, 2005 #12
    I think that Dubya thought we were all through a year ago, and could move right into Iran. We are so dead meat if we do that. Who will be left here to guard the US? I mean I have a baseball bat and a machete, I will do it, but really?

    We have no business in Iran. Look up the Irani Crown Jewels sometime, they are on a website, called the pentagon. For whatever reason...

  14. Jan 18, 2005 #13
    OK, when and what branch?
  15. Jan 18, 2005 #14


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Hmmm...PF hosts interrogations ? :bugeye:
  16. Jan 18, 2005 #15
    :confused: :confused:
  17. Jan 18, 2005 #16
    Interesting point considering that Iraq was looted during the chaos of the last venture. I bet there are a lot of collectors out there that would just love to have some of these items.
  18. Jan 18, 2005 #17


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I was in the Navy, not the CIA, so I'm not exactly qualified to do the job. When I was in the Navy, I would have done virtually whatever was asked that was relevant to my job to aid the war on terror. I was dismayed that my ship wasn't in a position to do more (not a lot of terrorists in Pascagoula, MS).
    The US has said dozens of times in the past 50 years that it would not rule out using nuclear weapons - was that ever a preparation for imminent usage? That message (and similar ones) is a common one and has a clear meaning in diplomatic context. Bush knows diplomacy (gunboat diplomacy) better than you realize - and I think better than you understand.
    Doubtful, considering the story you are alluding to (the stolen museum artifacts) was a fabrication.
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2005
  19. Jan 18, 2005 #18
    So have you found that ham sandwich yet?

    You might want to go back an re-read your contract, you may be out but you just may be re-called. Good Luck!

    Be careful russ, you just may blow your cover. Besides, you CIA guys are being marginalized.

    True but that is not the MO of this administration. There is already a plan in place and they are just waiting for the right time to execute it. The quick response of the DoD to the Hersch article is a tell. My thought is once the inauguration is over this week and the euphoria subsides, the news cycle will be focused on Iran and obvious propaganda in order to justify the invasion. Diplomacy is a prestense for this crew and a tell to their true intent.

    So in the betting pool, I put you down as a 'no go'. Excellent, that will help offset the cost for whomever wins.

    Hold on there russ, it may have been dismissed in your mind and the story may have been cycled out but the case of the missing goods apparently stands. http://cctr.umkc.edu/user/fdeblauwe/iraq.html is a nice scholar who has been cataloging these missing items and news links. It is quite extensive.

    So how much would it cost to send in a team to acquire the artifacts during the chaos of a conflict? How much would it retrieve on the black market? Risk vs reward, it is all simple economics russ.
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2017
  20. Jan 18, 2005 #19


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    If you have any evidence of any of those assertions, by all means present it. Where can I read this plan?
    His "my best guess" is not far from the official word. The primary bone of contention would be the half a million low quality artifacts in storage, of which he guesses 3% are missing. These are not the pieces reported in the fabricated story. The fabricated story was concerning the display-quality pieces in the museum itself: Of roughly 10,000 higher quality pieces in the museum and elsewhere, he guesses there are only 57 missing. Its also nice to see this:
    500,000 artifacts? Tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars.

    This is discussed further in a different thread, and calling it a fabrication (at the time) may be too harsh - it may have been a misunderstanding - though if still claimed today, it is a fabrication, since now the truth is known. The story is based on a quote from the museum curator. More here: http://www2.rnw.nl/rnw/en/currentaffairs/region/middleeast/ira030926.html

    Several important points:
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 21, 2017
  21. Jan 18, 2005 #20


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Of course. It's always easier to attack the character and actions of your opponent rather than the merit of his arguments.
  22. Jan 18, 2005 #21


    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Even to a non-diplomat layman like me, the following quote is telling

    That's plain code for WMDs, most likely nukes, but at least chem/bio weapons. Whether they have them or not, I don't know, but that statement is a pretty clear implication that they want us to think they do.

    Who would Iran use them on if cornered ? Hint : not the US. There is a much closer and more hated foe than even the Great Satan; one which Iran thinks is a weak spot in American sentimentality.

    When Israel is nuked/gassed/germed, then we can all set our clocks to countdown to Armageddon.
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2005
  23. Jan 19, 2005 #22
    Russ you know as well as I do that even if I had access to those "plans" that I would be commiting a federal offense that would send me down river for years. Plus I would'nt leak them on a forum such as this one, too risky! Since the conjecture is based upon my own speculations and renderings I will give you some of the basis of my thinking:

    Have you already forgot the '02 state of the union address placing Iran in the 'axis of evil'?

    How about this from the Financial Times:

    US Congress targets Iran for regime change

    And from Reuters:

    http://uk.news.yahoo.com/050119/325/fakj9.html [Broken]

    And from the epicenter of this adminstration's foreign policy making:


    If this is not enought to convince you that the plans are already in the works and that invading Iran on some pretense is in the making then I guess that is your perogative. Personally, I hope I am wrong!

    As far as the looting goes, I found a recent article from the VOA with a really interesting statement.

    http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-01-06-voa5.cfm [Broken]

    As far as I can tell, it would not take that much to send in a skilled team to take selected objects and get an excellent return. Once again russ, it is just simple ecomnoics!
    Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2017
  24. Jan 19, 2005 #23


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Great, so you're making it up as you go along. Thanks for at least being honest about it.
  25. Jan 19, 2005 #24
    I backed up my points at least! The rest is up to the reader to decide.

    Let me take an educated wild-ass guess about something:

    You were one of these guys that were huffing and puffing about how Hussein had WMDs, how there were definitive ties to al-queda, and how he was a threat to the U.S.!?! I'm sure there is a lot more but I will just leave it at that.

    BTW, when it comes to guessing or 'making things up' as you put it, on a bad day I hit at least twice the batting average of the greatest MLB players. That's not too shaby!

    I really don't think you're handlers are getting their money's worth!:rolleyes:

    So have you found that ham sandwich yet!?! :rofl:
  26. Jan 19, 2005 #25
    I'm no diplomat either, but it is a game with potentially lethal consequences.

    High stakes nuclear/chemical/bio weapons poker! Far too rich for my blood.

    I really can't speculate if they would use them in a defensive mode or strike Israel just because. Either way, if it is true that they posses such weapons there could be a high death toll and that is not acceptable IMHO. I personally can't see any real justification but that hasn't stopped anyone before.

    At least for the middle east. I wonder when The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists will reset the Doomsday Clock?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook