According to the Washington
Times, a "former senior Defense official" (SecDef Cheney?)
knows "for a fact" that Adm. William J. Fallon commander of all
U.S. armed forces in the MidEast and Persian Gulf regions "was fired"
last week because Iran and Syria were allegedly allowing "foreign fighters"
to cross into Iraq and "kill our soldiers" and "Fallon was unwilling
to do anything to hold those countries accountable."
How does this "former senior Defense official" expect Syria and Iran to close their borders with Iraq? The same way the Israelis closed Gaza's border with Egypt? Or the same way Bush intends to close our border with Mexico?
And, since closing their borders is obviously impossible, what does Bush expect
Fallon to do to hold Syria and Iran "accountable"?
4,000 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq since President Bush defied
the UN Security Council and launched an unauthorized, unprovoked War of Aggression
against Iraq and its virtually defenseless population, and there can be no doubt
who should be held accountable for all those deaths, thousands of Americans
and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.
Some people call him the Commander-in-Chief of the War on Terror. Others just call him Dubya.
Of course, Dubya probably didn't expect he'd be held accountable for all those
Iraqi deaths, because it is the "victors" who write history and Dubya
expected to be a quick victor and to write the history of the so-called Operation
Iraqi Freedom, himself, before he left office.
Dubya's game plan for his War of Aggression against Iran was to be virtually identical to his game plan for Iraq.
By law, the constitutional
powers of the president to "introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities"
are limited, and can only be exercised "pursuant to; (a) a declaration of war,
(b) specific statutory authorization, or (c) a national emergency created by
attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed
Well, a "declaration of war" is out of the question.
When Bush went to Congress in September 2002, seeking "specific statutory authorization" to invade Iraq, he based his case on a just completed highly-classified National Intelligence Estimate, which supposedly contained "slam-dunk" evidence that Saddam was reconstructing his nuke and chem-bio programs, with the intention of supplying them to Islamic terrorists for use against us.
A thoroughly alarmed Congress quickly enacted the "Congressional
Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against
However, the authority given by Congress was conditional.
Before resorting to force, Bush was required to satisfy Congress that "reliance on peaceful means alone will not adequately protect the national security of the United States."
Hence, Dubya's authority was contingent upon first pursuing a "diplomatic
solution" through the United Nations. If UN diplomacy failed, Dubya was
then supposed to seek a new Security Council resolution, which would authorize
the use of "all necessary means" to disarm Saddam Hussein. If Dubya got such
a new Security Council resolution, then Congress had already given him specific
authority to use our armed forces to enforce it.
But, by March, 2003 as a result of months of totally intrusive inspections,
ordered by UN Security Council, and complied with by Saddam Hussein it was
obvious to everyone that Saddam did not pose an immediate threat to us or to
anyone else. Hence, no such new Security Council resolution would be forthcoming.
Nevertheless, on March 19 the day the British Parliament authorized Prime
Minister Tony Blair to also use force against Iraq Dubya notified Congress
that no "further diplomatic or other peaceful means will adequately protect
the national security of the United States from the continuing [nuclear weapons]
threat posed by Iraq."
That was a lie, of course, and many Senators knew it. In fact, by then, the
Senate knew or should have known that the 2002 NIE on Iraq's nuclear threat
had been revealed to be little better than a lie.
The 2005 NIE on Iran's Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities produced
in accordance with Dubya's pursuit of his Iraq game plan was little better,
totally ignoring the publicly available IAEA reports, especially those resulting
from Iran's compliance
with an Additional Protocol to its IAEA Safeguards Agreement.
After thousands of man-hours of go-anywhere see-anything inspections, at sites "declared" by the Iranians and at others, some military, suggested by our intelligence community, IAEA Director-General ElBaradei has declared there is "no indication" that Iran has a nuclear weapons program.
So, since even the 2007
revision to the 2005 NIE agrees with ElBaradei that Iran doesn't have a
nuclear weapons program, then a significant attack on the American Homeland
as a casus belli is out.
Okay, what about "an attack upon our armed forces" in Iraq?
That might work.
So, the 2007 revision publicly released in November makes no mention
of the IAEA but does "assess with high confidence that until fall 2003"
when Iran began complying with its Additional Protocol to its IAEA Safeguards
Agreement "Iranian military entities were working under government direction
to develop nuclear weapons."
Furthermore, "Iran has been intensifying aspects of its lethal support
for select groups of Iraqi Shia militants, particularly the JAM [Jaysh al-Mahdi],
since at least the beginning of 2006. Explosively formed penetrator (EFP) attacks
have risen dramatically.'
Amendment, which had passed the Senate overwhelmingly in September, cited
the not-yet-released 2007 NIE revision and stated that,
"it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain,
and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside
Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, its foreign facilitators
such as Lebanese Hezbollah, and its indigenous Iraqi proxies";
"the United States should designate the Islamic Revolutionary Guards
Corps as a foreign terrorist organization under section 219 of the Immigration
and Nationality Act and place the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps on
the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, as established under
the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and initiated under Executive
Okay, now we're beginning to understand Dubya's revised game plan. The President
can legally "introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities" in
Iran because the Most Gullible Senate Money Can Buy is on record as demanding
that the Iranians stop "foreign fighters" from crossing the border
into Iraq and "killing our soldiers."
And Adm. Fallon has just been "fired," apparently because he doesn't
consider the Iranians alleged transgressions to be a sufficient cause to start
World War III.