U.S. Campaign Aimed at Iran's Leaders

As the dispute over its nuclear program arrives at the U.N. Security Council today, Iran has vaulted to the front of the U.S. national security agenda amid Bush administration plans for a sustained campaign against the ayatollahs of Tehran.

President Bush and his team have been huddling in closed-door meetings on Iran, summoning scholars for advice, investing in opposition activities, creating an Iran office in Washington and opening listening posts abroad dedicated to the efforts against Tehran.

The internal administration debate that raged in the first term between those who advocated more engagement with Iran and those who preferred confrontation appears in the second term to be largely settled in favor of the latter.

In private meetings, Bush and his advisers have been more explicit. Members of the Hoover Institution's board of overseers who met with Bush, Vice President Cheney and national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley two weeks ago emerged with the impression that the administration has shifted to a more robust policy aimed at the Iranian government. The focus on Iran inside the administration lately has been striking. Bush, according to aides, has been spending more time on the issue, and advisers have invited 30 to 40 specialists for consultations in recent months.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/12/AR2006031201016.html

Watch out Iran.

I've read that Elizabeth Cheney will be in charge of pushing "democracy" in Iran. They got $85 million in emergency funding.

The question that I have is, how are they going to do this? Are they planning to print alternative newspapers, maybe hand out leaflets on the street corners? I know they are planning to start up radio programs; now they're going to run them 24/7.

Cheney will probably also give money to rebel groups. The problem is, these rebel groups will take the money, but they might double-cross her. After all, this is a woman who grew up with money and privilege, servants and housekeepers. What does she know about a life-and-death struggle for one's country? And are the clerics just going to sit still for this?

Also, from what I've seen, Ahmadinejad is quite popular. This country is not weak! Not like the ones we've toppled in the past.

We may be in over our heads......to be continued.

Where they will help create an oil-rich, predominantly Shi'ia, Iran friendly political entity in what is now Southern Iraq. Of course some of the money will filter into the pockets of the Cheneys and their friends too.

in the streets. This people are addicted to military power, except that in the process of using it in places like Iraq, they are destroying the very military they claim to love.

in all this--the 'effect' to the morale of the US military...?

Sure, the genocidal bombings, the torture, incompetence, looting and oil-resource theft doesn't phase the 'rep' of the military, BUT Bush proposing a fraudulent intel op against Iran, does 'destroy' the military they love...

Good Topic For Fox: What will the effect of invading Iran have on troop morale?

U.S. Campaign Is Aimed at Iran's Leaders
Uneasy About Tehran's Nuclear Plans, Bush Administration Tries to Build Opposition to Theocracy
By Peter Baker and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, March 13, 2006; Page A01


As the dispute over its nuclear program arrives at the U.N. Security Council today, Iran has vaulted to the front of the U.S. national security agenda amid Bush administration plans for a sustained campaign against the ayatollahs of Tehran.

President Bush and his team have been huddling in closed-door meetings on Iran, summoning scholars for advice, investing in opposition activities, creating an Iran office in Washington and opening listening posts abroad dedicated to the efforts against Tehran.

The internal administration debate that raged in the first term between those who advocated more engagement with Iran and those who preferred more confrontation appears in the second term to be largely settled in favor of the latter. Although administration officials do not use the term "regime change" in public, that in effect is the goal they outline as they aim to build resistance to the theocracy.

"We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in Senate testimony last week. "We do not have a problem with the Iranian people. We want the Iranian people to be free. Our problem is with the Iranian regime."

In private meetings, Bush and his advisers have been more explicit. Members of the Hoover Institution's board of overseers who met with Bush, Vice President Cheney and national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley two weeks ago emerged with the impression that the administration has shifted to a more robust policy aimed at the Iranian government....


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/12/AR2006031201016.html

go right ahead.
How is New Orleans?
Cant even get it right at home and you want to start a bigger Iraq
Whee how deep hole need to be to buried USA.

"We do not have a problem with the American people. We want the American people to be free. Our problem is with the Bush regime."

Signed,
An American Citizen Who is Sick of Your BS

.
.
.

Iran is MUCH stronger than Iraq, and much larger

The only way the US can take Iran is using nukes

And using nukes in Russia and China's backyard ain't a real good idea methinks

USA's gotta start taking care of it's own citizens - the homeless, the uninsured - silly stuff like that

If the USA would concentrate on their own country for a bit, maybe it COULD be great - but greed persists as it's numbers of millionaires and billionaires increase - but then so do it's numbers of unemployed, underemployed, homeless and so on -

Any "leader" should be ashamed - but alas - the USA just has Korporate managers at the helm - and warmongers to boot

(sigh)

That was the sub-heading on this article when it was printed in the Ann Arbor News today.

:scared: