I was watching the newsnight review thing on Friday and at the end of it they did a round up of the following days headlines - one of the broadsheets was leading with the headline that if Bush got back in one of his policies would be to topple the regieme in Iran.

If this is the case (and I admit it is a big if!) what possible excuse could they use for this (surely not WMD again!) and what is going on in Bush's skull - its almost as if he thinks he is on some crusade to purge the holy land?!?!

It's obvious they are thinking about going for Iran next. Yesterday the head of the CIA said that they have found evidence that 3 of the 9/11 terrorists had pasted through Iran at some point. This information was given at a big press conference.... *YAWN*...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200407/s1156534.htm

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,10180724%255E1702,00.html

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/16/clinton.alqaeda.reut/

Originally posted by evildrneil
If this is the case (and I admit it is a big if!) what possible excuse could they use for this (surely not WMD again!)

I suppose Washington will declare Iran a terrorist state...as they do with any Middle East country who refuses to recognise Israel.

I did expect Syria to be next on the hitlist, seeing as Syria shares a physical border with Israel, but it seems that Iran's nuclear aspirations have pushed it to the top.

Either way, I have already warned you all not to book a holiday in Iran or Syria.

Originally posted by evildrneil
What is going on in Bush's skull - its almost as if he thinks he is on some crusade to purge the holy land?!?!

It seems to me that the unique brand of Bush / Blair right-wing Christian extremism is more of a threat to the Middle East (and the World) than Islamic extremism, but then I may be a little biased.

Originally posted by Abdul
It seems to me that the unique brand of Bush / Blair right-wing Christian extremism is more of a threat to the Middle East (and the World) than Islamic extremism, but then I may be a little biased.

Not sure about more dangerous (well apart from they have more weapons to back it up!) but certainly at least AS dangerous. At the moment god (small g god there was intentional!) must be at least agnostic over humanity if not positively a-anthro-istic!

Originally posted by Snook
It's obvious they are going for Iran next. Yesterday the head of the CIA said that they have found evidence that 3 of the 9/11 terrorists had pasted through Iran at some point
Some passed through Britain at some point which means there's not much justification for attacking Iran OR it's a case of buy your bomb shelters now- we're next!
Of course we know Bush's justification, I can hear him now: "These are bad men" that'll be enough for him.
If James the First was the 'Wisest Fool in Christendom' , Bush is the 'Stupidest Fool in Christendom" Frightening ain't he?

Washington have had Iran on the 'axis of evil' list for quite a while now - certainly the last couple of years.

Iran is very close to having a running fast breeder reactor program. When Iraq got to this point in 1979 / 80 the Israelis bombed the plant before it went hot.

Once the Iranian nuclear plant goes live it would be very difficult to take it out without generating a rather nasty cloud of fallout. As the main reason for an oil rich country having a breeder reactor nowadays would be to produce plutonium, expect to see the US insist on the reactor not going live and then see either teh Israelis or the US attack the plant within days of the fuel being delivered.

And let's face it - Iran has been bottom of the US hit parade since the 1979 revolution.

Joe

http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/article.aspx?as=article&f=uk_-_olgbtopnews&t=11881&id=62699&d=20040721&do=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk&i=http://newsbox.msn.co.uk/mediaexportlive&ks=0&mc=5&lc=en&ae=windows-1252

Well, what would make me super happy would be if Iran and Israel both declared their nuclear programmes in accordance with the IAEA - but to expect any Arab nation to fully declare its atomic weapons program, let alone disband it unilaterally is highly unrealistic. At least whilst Israel retains the world's least secret Secret Atomic Weapons Project and refuses to acknowledge its existence to anyone (to avoid IAEA inspection).

The thing about starting a war with Iran, is that they have not spent the last 10 years under a daily regime of allied bombing and total economic ostracism, so are better placed to deal with an attack from the allies (whoever they may be this time).

I think the US Regime will actually secretly fund Islamic terrorists in Saudi until there is a Wahabi Muslim Revolution, at which point they can invade to protect their 'national interest'. This would be a lot easier than invading Iran.

Appeasing, or indeed assisting, the US regime will only result in the further expansion and attempted domination of global resources by the Christian Fundamentalist Coterie that is at its centre.

The Wisconsin project, which is a world renown institute that works to slow the growth of WMD across the world not so long ago added a new section. A page dedicated to Iran's activities.
:suspect:

http://www.iranwatch.org/

Funny how bus doesn't seem to be to bothered about going after Saudi Arabia when most of the poeple involved in 911 came from there.

If i remember rightly, at the time of the 9/11 terror attacks, Bush stated that America would seek out ALL known threats to it's own security around the world and if need be, strike first!.

Originally posted by vidster
If i remember rightly, at the time of the 9/11 terror attacks, Bush stated that America would seek out ALL known threats to it's own security around the world and if need be, strike first!.

I would like to find out how far that threat would go as the UK has citizens that participated in the 9/11 attacks.
Recruitment for terrorist acts against the USA has been going on for some time here.
Would this mean that the UK could be threatened by the USA?