us uk israel will go to war with iran

British Labor Party Insider: US, UK, Israel Will Go to War with
Iran

Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 02:22:33 EDT From: Seth17279@aol. com

British Labor Party Insider: US, UK, Israel Will Go to War with Iran

by Leland Lehrman, leland. lehrman@gmail. com

We've all been worried about a looming war with Iran and Syria for
quite some time now. Here in Santa Fe, New Mexico, young men and women
protest every week on the Plaza downtown under the banners, "Stop the
Next War Now" and "No War Against Iran. " Try as I may, I just can't
figure out how to comment on the tragic, but definitively diabolical
Israeli invasion of Lebanon, supported as it is by rush shipments of
"precision guided munitions" and "experimental weaponry" from the Bush
Administration. I should say however, that it is clearly designed as
part of the desired larger regional war involving Syria and Iran.
Perhaps it's best to let Israel Shahak, former professor at Hebrew
University in Jerusalem comment for me:

"The wish for peace, so often assumed as the Israeli aim, is not in my
view a principle of Israeli policy, while the wish to extend Israeli
domination and influence is ... Israel is preparing for a war, nuclear
if need be, for the sake of averting domestic change not to its liking,
if it occurs in some or any Middle Eastern states ... Israel clearly
prepares itself to seek overtly a hegemony over the entire Middle East
... , without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available,
including nuclear ones. " ...

Nafeez Ahmed broke the story this week that government insiders believe
the US and UK will go to war with Iran. He is the esteemed author of
The War on Freedom, perhaps the first book to expose the official 911
story as manipulated propaganda designed to legitimate foreign military
adventures. He writes from England and has recently testified before
Congress regarding his research. This is what he has learned regarding
Iran, as published on his excellent blog where you can read this story
with links intact. Of course, I hope we can prove his source to be
wrong.

UK Govt Sources Confirm War With Iran Is On by Nafeez Ahmed

In the last few days, I learned from a credible and informed source
that a former senior Labour government Minister, who continues to be
well-connected to British military and security officials, confirms
that Britain and the United States "... will go to war with Iran before
the end of the year. "

As we now know from similar reporting prior to the invasion of Iraq,
it's quite possible that the war planning may indeed change repeatedly,
and the war may again be postponed. In any case, it's worth noting that
the information from a former Labour Minister corroborates expert
analyses suggesting that Israel, with US and British support, is
deliberately escalating the cycle of retaliation to legitimize the
imminent targeting of Iran before year's end. Let us remind ourselves,
for instance, of US Vice President Cheney's assertions recorded on
MSNBC over a year ago. He described Iran as being "right at the top of
the list" of "rogue states". He continued: "One of the concerns people
have is that Israel might do it without being asked... Given the fact
that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction
of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the
rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess
afterwards. "

But the emphasis on Israel's pre-eminent role in a prospective assault
on Iran is not accurate. [Not so sure about that - Ed. ] Israel would
rather play the role of a regional proxy force in a US-led campaign.
"Despite the deteriorating security situation in Iraq, the Bush
Administration has not reconsidered its basic long-range policy goal in
the Middle East... " reports Seymour Hersh. He quotes a former
high-level US intelligence official as follows:

"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. We've declared war and the bad
guys, wherever they are, are the enemy. This is the last hurrahâ*"we've
got four years, and want to come out of this saying we won the war on
terrorism. "

Are these just the fanatical pipedreams of the neoconservative faction
currently occupying (literally) the White House?

Unfortunately, no. The Iraq War was one such fanatical pipedream in the
late 1990s, one that Bush administration officials were eagerly
ruminating over when they were actively and directly involved in the
Project for a New American Century. But that particular pipedream is
now a terrible, gruelling reality for the Iraqi people. Despite the
glaring failures of US efforts in that country, there appears to be a
serious inability to recognize the futility of attempting the same in
Iran.

The Monterey Institute for International Studies already showed nearly
two years ago in a detailed analysis that the likely consequences of a
strike on Iran by the US, Israel, or both, would be a regional
conflagaration that could quickly turn nuclear, and spiral out of
control. US and Israeli planners are no doubt aware of what could
happen. Such a catastrophe would have irreversible ramifications for
the global political economy. Energy security would be in tatters,
precipitating the activation of long-standing contingency plans to
invade and occupy all the major resource-rich areas of the Middle East
and elsewhere (see my book published by Clairview, Behind the War on
Terror for references and discussion). Such action could itself trigger
responses from other major powers with fundamental interests in
maintaining their own access to regional energy supplies, such as
Russia and particularly China, which has huge interests in Iran.
Simultaneously, the dollar-economy would be seriously undermined, most
likely facing imminent collapse in the context of such crises.

Which raises pertinent questions about why Britain, the US and Israel
are contemplating such a scenario as a viable way of securing their
interests.

A glimpse of an answer lies in the fact that the post-9/11 military
geostrategy of the "War on Terror" does not spring from a position of
power, but rather from entirely the opposite. The global system has
been crumbling under the weight of its own unsustainability for many
years now, and we are fast approaching the convergence of multiple
crises that are already interacting fatally as I write. The peak of
world oil production, of which the Bush administration is well aware,
either has already just happened, or is very close to happening. It is
a pivotal event that signals the end of the Oil Age, for all intents
and purposes, with escalating demand placing increasing pressure on
dwindling supplies. Half the world's oil reserves are, more or less,
depleted, which means that it will be technologically, geophysically,
increasingly difficult to extract conventional oil. I had a chat last
week with some scientists from the Omega Institute in Brighton,
directed by my colleague and friend Graham Ennis (scroll down about
2/3's to see Graham's letter published in The Independent), who told me
eloquently and powerfully what I already knew, that while a number of
climate "tipping-points" may or may not have yet been passed, we have
about 10-15 years before the "tipping-point" is breached certainly and
irreversibly. Breaching that point means plunging head-first into
full-scale "climate catastrophe". Amidst this looming Armageddon of
Nature, the dollar-denominated economy itself has been teetering on the
edge of spiralling collapse for the last seven years or more. This is
not idle speculation. A financial analyst as senior as Paul Volcker,
Alan Greenspan's immediate predecessor as chairman of the Federal
Reserve, recently confessed "that he thought there was a 75% chance of
a currency crisis in the United States within five years. "

There appears to have been a cold calculation made at senior levels
within the Anglo-American policymaking establishment: that the system
is dying, but the last remaining viable means of sustaining it remains
a fundamentally military solution designed to reconfigure and
rehabilitate the system to continue to meet the requirements of the
interlocking circuits of military-corporate power and profit.

The highly respected US whistleblower, former RAND strategic analyst
Daniel Ellsberg, who was Special Assistant to Assistant Secretary of
Defense during the Vietnam conflict and became famous after leaking the
Pentagon Papers, has already warned of his fears that in the event of:

"... another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U. S.
attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or
within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve
massive detentions in this country, detention camps for
middle-easterners and their quote 'sympathizers', critics of the
President's policy and essentially the wiping-out of the Bill of
Rights. "

So is that what all the "emergency preparedness" legislation, here in
the UK as well as in the USA and in Europea, is all about? The US plans
are bad enough, as Ellsberg notes, but the plans UK scene is hardly
better, prompting The Guardian to describe the Civil Contingencies Bill
(passed as an Act in 2004) as "the greatest threat to civil liberty
that any parliament is ever likely to consider. "

As global crises converge over the next few years, we the people are
faced with an unprecedented opportunity to use the growing awareness of
the inherent inhumanity and comprehensive destructiveness of the global
imperial system to establish new, viable, sustainable and humane ways
of living. Unfortunately, we have no other option. There is still
light, however dim it may seem in this overwhelming smog of escalating
calamity...

--