I don't even know where to begin with this. The story is from the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh, who unfortunately gets his stories right.
Bush is planning to attack Iran with a massive massive attack. He's afraid Iran is developing nukes, so the idea is to launch a devastating attack against Iran so that - get this - the Iranians rise up against their own government. Sound familiar?
From the New Yorker:
One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ”Sound like Iraq yet? Try this quote:
A senior Pentagon adviser on the war on terror expressed a similar view. “This White House believes that the only way to solve the problem is to change the power structure in Iran, and that means war,” he said.Yes, Bush has already decided that diplomacy won't work. He's already decided that the only way to solve the problem is to declare war on Iran. Just like the way the White House had already decided to attack Iraq the day after September 11, to hell with the evidence, to hell with the wisdom of it.
And one of the options the White House is considering, is using tactical nukes against Iran. Yes, nukes.
Yes, nukes.
One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites.And while the military is trying to take the nuclear option off the table, the White House is refusing to budge, they want the nukes:
Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans for Iran—without success, the former intelligence official said. “The White House said, ‘Why are you challenging this? The option came from you.’ ”If Bush uses nukes against Iran, kiss every high-rise in America good-bye. Kiss our relationship with every country in the world good-bye. Not to mention, as Hersh notes, imagine the reaction from the world's 1.2 billion Muslims if we nuke their brothers. I'm not one to shy away from a confrontation, but going nuclear? And against a country that has decades of experience with international terror? Is he mad?
Here's the dilemma for the US. Iran cannot be allowed to have nukes. But George Bush cannot be allowed to be the man running the war against Iran - he's going to screw it up. Something has to give, and that give is Bush.
The only way to take on Iran responsibly - whether that means war or diplomacy or something else - is for Bush and his senior leadership to step down. America cannot afford this man as president any longer. He is, quite literally, going to get us all killed.
We cannot afford having George Bush think that America is in the business of launching pre-emptive nuclear wars.
