The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Suprised this hasn't been mentioned already to be honest, as taken from TimesOnline.co.uk:
American special forces have been carrying out secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran to help identify potential nuclear, chemical and missile targets, according to a report in The New Yorker magazine.
The secret missions have been going on since last summer with the goal of identifying target information for three dozen or more suspected sites, said the article, written by the Pulitzer-winning reporter Seymour Hersh.
He quotes one government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon as saying: "The civilians in the Pentagon want to go into Iran and destroy as much of the military infrastructure as possible."
One former high-level intelligence official said: "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."
In response, the White House said that Iran is a concern and a threat that needs to be taken seriously. But it disputed the report by Mr Hersh, who last year exposed the extent of prisoner abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
"We obviously have a concern about Iran. The whole world has a concern about Iran," Dan Bartlett, a spokesman for President Bush, told CNN’s Late Edition programme.
Of The New Yorker report, he said: "I think it’s riddled with inaccuracies, and I don’t believe that some of the conclusions he’s drawing are based on fact."
Mr Bartlett said that the administration "will continue to work through the diplomatic initiatives" to convince Iran - which Bush once called part of an "axis of evil" - not to pursue nuclear weapons.
"No president, at any juncture in history, has ever taken military options off the table," Bartlett added. "But what President Bush has shown is that he believes we can emphasize the diplomatic initiatives that are underway right now."
President Bush has warned Iran against meddling in Iraqi elections.
The former intelligence official told Mr Hersh that an American commando task force in South Asia is working closely with a group of Pakistani scientists who had dealt with their Iranian counterparts.
The New Yorker reports that this task force, aided by information from Pakistan, has been penetrating into eastern Iran in a hunt for underground nuclear-weapons installations.
In exchange for this cooperation, the official told Mr Hersh, President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan has received assurances that his government will not have to turn over Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan’s atomic bomb, to face questioning about his role in selling nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea.
Mr Hersh reported that Bush has already "signed a series of top-secret findings and executive orders authorizing secret commando groups and other Special Forces units to conduct covert operations against suspected terrorist targets in as many as 10 nations in the Middle East and South Asia".
Defining these as military rather than intelligence operations, Mr Hersh reported, will enable the Bush administration to evade legal restrictions imposed on the CIA’s covert activities overseas.
American special forces have been carrying out secret reconnaissance missions inside Iran to help identify potential nuclear, chemical and missile targets, according to a report in The New Yorker magazine.
The secret missions have been going on since last summer with the goal of identifying target information for three dozen or more suspected sites, said the article, written by the Pulitzer-winning reporter Seymour Hersh.
He quotes one government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon as saying: "The civilians in the Pentagon want to go into Iran and destroy as much of the military infrastructure as possible."
One former high-level intelligence official said: "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."
In response, the White House said that Iran is a concern and a threat that needs to be taken seriously. But it disputed the report by Mr Hersh, who last year exposed the extent of prisoner abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
"We obviously have a concern about Iran. The whole world has a concern about Iran," Dan Bartlett, a spokesman for President Bush, told CNN’s Late Edition programme.
Of The New Yorker report, he said: "I think it’s riddled with inaccuracies, and I don’t believe that some of the conclusions he’s drawing are based on fact."
Mr Bartlett said that the administration "will continue to work through the diplomatic initiatives" to convince Iran - which Bush once called part of an "axis of evil" - not to pursue nuclear weapons.
"No president, at any juncture in history, has ever taken military options off the table," Bartlett added. "But what President Bush has shown is that he believes we can emphasize the diplomatic initiatives that are underway right now."
President Bush has warned Iran against meddling in Iraqi elections.
The former intelligence official told Mr Hersh that an American commando task force in South Asia is working closely with a group of Pakistani scientists who had dealt with their Iranian counterparts.
The New Yorker reports that this task force, aided by information from Pakistan, has been penetrating into eastern Iran in a hunt for underground nuclear-weapons installations.
In exchange for this cooperation, the official told Mr Hersh, President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan has received assurances that his government will not have to turn over Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan’s atomic bomb, to face questioning about his role in selling nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea.
Mr Hersh reported that Bush has already "signed a series of top-secret findings and executive orders authorizing secret commando groups and other Special Forces units to conduct covert operations against suspected terrorist targets in as many as 10 nations in the Middle East and South Asia".
Defining these as military rather than intelligence operations, Mr Hersh reported, will enable the Bush administration to evade legal restrictions imposed on the CIA’s covert activities overseas.
Page:
Your Honour wrote:
> Suprised this hasn't been mentioned already to be honest,
Some things are just too depressing to contemplate...
> Suprised this hasn't been mentioned already to be honest,
Some things are just too depressing to contemplate...
lcarus wrote:
> I remember Colin Powell making a briefing to the UN, showing this
> "irrefutable evidence"; very convincing it was too. I have
> no doubt that the US can drum up any fake intelligence that can
> convince the rest of the world. And who needs evidence anyway, as
> long as the motive is there to conquer, they'll do it. It'll be like
> this until a more powerful force does the same to them, or there's no
> country left to claim as their own.
The thing is most of the world knows Iran have some sort of Nuclear program. Two years ago, Iran deployed Shahab-3 ballistic missiles, with a range of 800 miles. At the same time, it was found to be making enriched uranium. Sure it may not be enough evidence to start a war, they obviously need more evidence, but it does indicate what there intentions are.
One thing is for sure, Iranians take Britain especially seriously, and the diplomatic approach sounds the best option. What annoys me is that it's also known that America are playing the bad cop while Britian France and Germany are playing the diplomatic field of play, but how is this tactic going to work if Iran knows what our tactics are? Its like the manager of a football club going into the other teams dressing room at half time and listening to what there strategy is for the second half. They know America is going to threaten them, but they also know that whatever America says, they will be a diplomatic follow up with the Country's just mentioned.
> I remember Colin Powell making a briefing to the UN, showing this
> "irrefutable evidence"; very convincing it was too. I have
> no doubt that the US can drum up any fake intelligence that can
> convince the rest of the world. And who needs evidence anyway, as
> long as the motive is there to conquer, they'll do it. It'll be like
> this until a more powerful force does the same to them, or there's no
> country left to claim as their own.
The thing is most of the world knows Iran have some sort of Nuclear program. Two years ago, Iran deployed Shahab-3 ballistic missiles, with a range of 800 miles. At the same time, it was found to be making enriched uranium. Sure it may not be enough evidence to start a war, they obviously need more evidence, but it does indicate what there intentions are.
One thing is for sure, Iranians take Britain especially seriously, and the diplomatic approach sounds the best option. What annoys me is that it's also known that America are playing the bad cop while Britian France and Germany are playing the diplomatic field of play, but how is this tactic going to work if Iran knows what our tactics are? Its like the manager of a football club going into the other teams dressing room at half time and listening to what there strategy is for the second half. They know America is going to threaten them, but they also know that whatever America says, they will be a diplomatic follow up with the Country's just mentioned.
china's in an ideal position, we should ask them.
That's probably the way Bush thinks. Invade a country 'for the fun of it'.
Its about time everyone turned around and invaded America, just for a laugh.
kevstar wrote:
and
> would find zero support in Europe unless there was irrifutable
> evidence regarding Irans nuclear plans.
I remember Colin Powell making a briefing to the UN, showing this "irrefutable evidence"; very convincing it was too. I have no doubt that the US can drum up any fake intelligence that can convince the rest of the world. And who needs evidence anyway, as long as the motive is there to conquer, they'll do it. It'll be like this until a more powerful force does the same to them, or there's no country left to claim as their own.
The joys of the modern civilised human world.
and
> would find zero support in Europe unless there was irrifutable
> evidence regarding Irans nuclear plans.
I remember Colin Powell making a briefing to the UN, showing this "irrefutable evidence"; very convincing it was too. I have no doubt that the US can drum up any fake intelligence that can convince the rest of the world. And who needs evidence anyway, as long as the motive is there to conquer, they'll do it. It'll be like this until a more powerful force does the same to them, or there's no country left to claim as their own.
The joys of the modern civilised human world.
Jack Straw has already stated that he doesn't see any circumstances in which military action would be justified against Iran full stop. Tony Blair will be very wary after everything thats happened in Iraq, and would find zero support in Europe unless there was irrifutable evidence regarding Irans nuclear plans.
Oh dear, if bush does have intentions to start on iran, i hope that the uk can keep their head out of this war. Assuming that it happens.
kevstar wrote:
> I think it's more of a scare tactic, Britain France and Germany are
> leading the diplomatic approach while America is playing the bad cop.
Absolutely. This whole story of secret reccy missions is either exaggerated or total fiction. What do the Yanks know about "identifying potential nuclear, chemical and missile targets." On the one hand this story lets Iran know the US means business, and on the other it re-enforces the view to the western public that Iran is up to no good.
Notice Bush didn't even mention Iraq in his speech. I think he's trying to forget it. Not very nice for the 1000s of troops still risking their lives over there.
Maybe he thinks starting on Iran will help everyone else forget Iraq, like Iraq seemed to help people forget Afghanistan, which wasn't the great success claimed. Vast areas lie in ruins from the bombing, massive heroin exports line the pockets of the warlords who control most of the country, women still live in fear, but hey, at least music is allowed again
> I think it's more of a scare tactic, Britain France and Germany are
> leading the diplomatic approach while America is playing the bad cop.
Absolutely. This whole story of secret reccy missions is either exaggerated or total fiction. What do the Yanks know about "identifying potential nuclear, chemical and missile targets." On the one hand this story lets Iran know the US means business, and on the other it re-enforces the view to the western public that Iran is up to no good.
Notice Bush didn't even mention Iraq in his speech. I think he's trying to forget it. Not very nice for the 1000s of troops still risking their lives over there.
Maybe he thinks starting on Iran will help everyone else forget Iraq, like Iraq seemed to help people forget Afghanistan, which wasn't the great success claimed. Vast areas lie in ruins from the bombing, massive heroin exports line the pockets of the warlords who control most of the country, women still live in fear, but hey, at least music is allowed again
kevstar wrote:
> Still it shouldn't have anything to do with America
few things ACTUALLY do.. but there they are.
> Still it shouldn't have anything to do with America
few things ACTUALLY do.. but there they are.
Page: