Guest Post: Iran's Option In Case Of Attack On Its Nuclear Facilities

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by David Stafford of Global Intelligence Report

Iran's Option In Case Of Attack On Its Nuclear Facilities

INCIDENT: Sources in the Gulf region report that Iran is preparing for a possible attack by Israel and/or the United States on one or more of its nuclear production units by stockpiling arms and munitions with its proxy militias in Kuwait and Bahrain. This comes as Bahrain arrests 23 opposition leaders accused of terrorism offences and hints that Iran is behind an alleged plot to overthrow the government.

SIGNIFICANCE: Bahrain's attempted coup reports should be taken seriously, as Iran knows that its best chance of fighting the US and/or Israel is by proxy. Hitting Bahrain hard would greatly upset the overall security situation in the Middle East and Gulf region.

BACKGROUND ANALYSIS: Earlier this month, the tiny Kingdom of Bahrain announced the arrest of 23 men whom it accused of wanting to commit acts of terrorism and plotting to overthrow the government. Bahrain may well be the smallest of Arab countries yet it contributes greatly to the overall security of the Gulf region and the Middle East. Among other things Bahrain serves as the regional headquarters to the US Navy fleet operating in the Persian Gulf. Strategically located at about halfway up the important sea lanes in the Gulf and through which most of the world's oil is carried from extraction sites to refineries aboard super tankers, the island nation of Bahrain is linked to the Saudi Arabian mainland by a 15-mile (24 km) causeway over the azure waters of the Persian Gulf. The causeway takes one into Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province, where the largest Saudi oil fields are located.

Saudi's Eastern Province is largely Shiite. Bahrain's population of 729,000 is composed of 70% of Shiites and the rest are Sunni. The Sunnis hold all the top positions of power in the country, from the king on down to every major office. The Shiites, who generally feel they are treated as second-rate citizens, relate to their coreligionists in the nearby Islamic Republic. Iran periodically likes to remind the Bahrainis that their island used to belong to Iran and that the Iranians have not forgotten that. This is a part of the world where tensions run high and conflicts can easily ignite, particularly given that all the ingredients for an explosive situation are present: oil, religion and politics.


Sounding the Alarm in Bahrain: The events that unfolded in recent days in Bahrain could represent a very real and present danger to the security of the region. The men arrested in Bahrain were said to be working for "outside forces," the term usually meant to indicate Iran. Pointing the finger directly at the Islamic Republic can prove to be a dangerous gamble. Yet that language remains clear. The report of an attempted coup in Bahrain is something that must be taken very seriously and should send alarm sirens wailing all the way from Manama, the capital of the tiny kingdom to the corridors of power in Washington.

Iran's Choices: Tehran realizes two very important facts in case of attack against its nuclear facilities. First is that if attacked by Israel and/or the United States it will be incapable of striking back directly seeing the US' domination of the skies and Israel's quasi-impregnable air defense system (with US contribution). And second, Iran also knows that it must retaliate at all costs or lose all credibility. The solution? Fight them (the US and/or Israel) by proxy. And hit them hard. And make it hurt.

How do they go about this? Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite paramilitary movement, is in a perfect position to hit Israeli towns and cities from the north and could target large centers of population as far south as Hadera and possible further. Hezbollah's arsenal includes long-range field artillery and Iranian-supplied medium-range rockets. From the south, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement, can target Israeli locations, including the suburbs of Tel Aviv. Hamas' artillery is more crude and their Qasam rockets are home made and inaccurate, though they can still cause damage and casualties.

In the Gulf, Iran supports, arms, and trains Kuwait's very own Hezbollah, who in turn is believed to have been supplying training and weapons to the Bahraini Shiites, such as the 23 men who were recently arrested in Bahrain. And, of course, one must not forget the influence Tehran carries in Iraq, where the US still has some 50,000 troops deployed and where Iranian-backed militias would very likely go on a shooting spree.

How seriously should one take the accusations? Iran has periodically reminded Bahrain that the island is/was part of Iran. And if attacked by Israel and/or the US, Iran might decide to push the envelope - especially if they feel they have popular support on the island.


By Global Intelligence Report Staff

For Breaking Geopolitical Intelligence, economic forecasting, trends and World News visit the Global Intelligence Report.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
newstreet's picture

Here come the "paid" posters.

Clancy's picture

I just got an urgent Megaphone alert, what's going on in this thread?

svendthrift's picture

Excellent reference sir.

hbjork1's picture

Its the distant sound of Black Helicopters!

morkov's picture

how about Iran sinking vessels to block the shipping route ??

iota's picture

Not business friendly Bahrain!

eatthebanksters's picture

Do you really beleive the big "O" will actually attack Iran before the midterm elections to score political points? would not be able to argue for lack of transparency!

Anarchist's picture

The US wants to stay in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gulf region for the next 100 years. An attack on Iran would raise the cost of occupation to unknown levels and would not guarantee the Monarchists could retake power.

geopol's picture

Some thoughts...

 After about two and a half years during which the danger of war between the United States and Iran was at a relatively low level, this threat is now rapidly increasing. A pattern of political and diplomatic events, military deployments, and media chatter now indicates that Anglo-American ruling circles, acting through the troubled Obama administration, are currently gearing up for a campaign of bombing against Iran, combined with special forces incursions designed to stir up rebellions among the non-Persian nationalities of the Islamic Republic. Naturally, the probability of a new fake Gulf of Tonkin incident or false flag terror attack staged by the Anglo-American war party and attributed to Iran or its proxies is also growing rapidly.

The moment in the recent past when the US came closest to attacking Iran was August-September 2007, at about the time of the major Israeli bombing raid on Syria.1 This was the phase during which the Cheney faction in effect hijacked a fully loaded B-52 bomber equipped with six nuclear-armed cruise missiles, and attempted to take it to the Middle East outside of the command and control of the Pentagon, presumably to be used in a colossal provocation designed by the private rogue network for which Cheney was the visible face. A few days before the B-52 escaped control of legally constituted US authorities, a group of antiwar activists issued The Kennebunkport Warning of August 24-25, 2007, which had been drafted by the present writer.2 It was very significant that US institutional forces acted at that time to prevent the rogue B-52 from proceeding on its way towards the Middle East. The refusal to let the rogue B-52 take off reflected a growing consensus in the US military-intelligence community and the ruling elite in general that the Bush-Cheney-neocon policy of direct military aggression towards all comers had become counterproductive and very dangerous, running the risk of a terminal case of imperial overstretch.

A prominent spokesman for the growing disaffection with the neocons was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who had been a national security director in the Carter administration. Brzezinski argued that no more direct military attacks by the United States should be made for the time being, and that US policy should rather focus on playing off other states against each other, while the US remained somewhat aloof. Brzezinski’s model was always his own successful playing of the Soviet Union against Afghanistan in 1979, leading to the collapse of the Soviet empire a decade later. A centerpiece of Brzezinski’s argument was evidently the claim that color revolutions on the model of Ukraine 2004 were much a better tool than the costly and dangerous US bombing and US invasion always championed by the monomaniacal neocons. There was clearly an implication that Brzezinski could deliver a color revolution in Iran, as he had done in Ukraine.

Brzezinski’s Nightmare of 2007 Is Back

Brzezinski formulated his critique of the neocon methods of aggression and imperialistic geopolitics in his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in February 2007, going so far as to point out the likely scenario of a false flag event or Gulf of Tonkin incident designed to embroil the United States in direct military hostilities with Iran. The heart of Brzezinski’s analysis was this: ‘If the United States continues to be bogged down in a protracted bloody involvement in Iraq, the final destination on this downhill track is likely to be a head-on conflict with Iran and with much of the world of Islam at large. A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a “defensive” U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.’ 3 Today we could add Lebanon and Syria to that list, plus perhaps Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, and some others in central Asia.

The factors contributing to the current increased danger level include three major trends:

The CIA’s Green Movement in Iran Has Fizzled

The US sponsored Green Movement in Iran has now demonstrably failed in its project of overthrowing the Achmadinejad government. Back in 2006-2007, the Brzezinski-Nye-Trilateral “soft power” or “smart power” group attacked the stupidity of the neocon plan for a direct US military attack on Iran by pointing out the opportunities for staging a color revolution in Iran, just as the Brzezinski faction had successfully staged the Orange Revolution to install NATO puppets in Ukraine. Why attack Iran directly, argued Brzezinski and his friends, when a US puppet regime in Teheran could be used against Russia and China in much the same way these same people had played Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, with catastrophic results of the latter. The apex of these subversion efforts came in June 2009, with the so-called Twitter Revolution, which was celebrated with hysterical gloating in the Anglo-American media. The Mousavi-Rafsanjani faction left no doubt about its CIA and MI-6 parentage with its signature chant of “Death to Russia, Death to China.” The illusion of an easy coup in Iran has died hard in Washington and London. But by June 2010, the impotence of the Green forces in Iran had become evident. Hillary Clinton is even complaining that Achmadinejad now represents a military-backed government which has marginalized the mullahs, whom the US has demonized in public but privately relied on to prevent the economic modernization of Iran. This gives rise to the tendency to fall back on the previous neocon plan for some combination of direct military attack by Israel and the United States, combined with escalated subversion efforts among the Baluchis, Azeris, Arabs, Turkmen, and Kurds of Iran.

Russian Policy Now Uncertain

During the time that the neocons were attempting to launch aggression against Iran, that task was rendered much more difficult by pervasive uncertainty about the possible reaction of Russia. One of the targets of any bombing campaign against Iran would necessarily be the Bushehr nuclear reactor, being built by Russian technicians. Neocon war planners had to worry about events like the visit to Tehran of Russian President Vladimir Putin on October 16, 2007. During the Putin era, Russian media and figures like General Leonid Ivashov took the lead in calling attention to suddenly increases in US-UK war preparations, as in the case of Operation Byte, the attack on Iran proposed for Good Friday, April 6, 2007.4 While it was thought very unlikely that Russia would risk general war as a result of an attack on Iran, there remained nevertheless the question as to what Russia actually would do. This dangerous uncertainty was a very serious obstacle for the pro-war agitation by the neocons. 

In this way, Putin was able to make a decisive contribution to the maintenance of world peace during the years after 9/11. As of mid-2010, it would appear that the foreign policy of Russian President Medvedev is momentarily evolving away from the fierce independence and Russian nationalism championed by Putin, and is placing more value on projects of cooperation with the NATO countries, sometimes obtained by unilateral concessions to the US. Part of this can be ascribed to the increasing influence of the free market ideologue Anatoly Chubais, the architect of the nomenklatura privatization of Soviet state property during the 1990s, whose concept of the modernization of the Russian economy depends very heavily on information technology, in which he portrays the United States as being in the lead. Newsweek has reported the approval of a new foreign policy outline drafted by the Russian foreign ministry which has allegedly gained provisional approval by President Medvedev. This document is entitled “Program for the Effective Exploitation on A Systemic Basis of Foreign Policy Factors for the Purposes of the Long-Term Development of the Russian Federation.” 5 The main immediate effect of the reported new Russian policy is the apparent willingness of the Kremlin to make important foreign policy concessions to the United States with very minimal returns. This in turn means that key unknowns surrounding a US attack on Iran have become less of a concern for the resurgent neocon war faction in Washington. This adds up to a situation in which an attack on Iran is now more likely.

The US-UK Hedge Fund Blitzkrieg Against the Euro Falters

It is a grave error to imagine that normal relations with the Anglo-American financiers can be obtained in the current world depression through conciliatory behavior. The US-UK are experiencing cataclysmic instability in the form of a financial breakdown crisis, and this crisis impels these powers towards irrational, adventuristic, and aggressive behavior. A key lesson of the 1930s is that, when imperialist financier elites are faced by a disintegration of their fictitious speculative bubbles, they often respond with strategic flights forward of the most lunatic sort. In the wake of the 2007-2008 disintegration of the Anglo-American banking system, the New York and London elites have shown signs of going collectively bonkers, although these clinical tendencies have been primarily expressed in the area of their reactionary domestic socioeconomic policies. The specific form assumed by this tendency after the second half of 2008 involves the severe weakening of the US dollar as the world reserve currency by the creation of a $24 trillion credit line by the Federal Reserve, US Treasury, and FDIC for the purpose of bailing out the Wall Street zombie banks. This tidal wave of dollars led to a severe weakening of the US greenback on international markets during most of the second half of 2009. In late 2009 and early 2010 a group of Anglo-American hedge funds around Soros, Paulson, David Einhorn, and others launched a speculative attack against the government bonds of Greece, Spain, and Portugal, with the goal of using a crisis in the southern tier of the euro to bring on a panic flight of hot money out of the euro, thus collapsing that currency to Third World levels. Partly because of the countermeasures instituted by the German government, including the banning of naked credit default swaps on Euroland bonds and naked shorts of German stocks, and partly thanks to direct support from China, the planned Anglo-American blitzkrieg against the euro has now bogged down after eight months of effort, with the euro currently oscillating at a price of about $1.25 – $1.30. This means that, unless the city of London and Wall Street can come up with a new plan, the forces of world economic depression represented by $1.5 quadrillion of bankrupt and kited derivatives may now find a new victim, most likely in the form of either the British pound or the US dollar. 

The immediate threat of a pound or dollar currency collapse is leading the ruling financier factions to reconsider a very dangerous flight forward in the form of an attack on Iran, precisely because such an aggression would likely lead to a blocking of the Straits of Hormuz or in any case to a serious disruption of one third of the world’s tanker traffic. Following the tested model of the Kippur war/oil boycott of October 1973, the US-UK financiers would bid up the price of oil to $500 or $1000 per barrel, thus creating enough demand for dollars to soak up much of the dollar overhang and prop up the greenback, at least for a time.

An Astronomical Oil Price As Salvation for The US Dollar

As Jean-Michel Vernochet of the Réseau Voltaire has pointed out, the likely Iranian retaliation for the looming attack in terms of interdicting Hormuz and the Gulf is actually built into the US-UK war plan as a positive contribution towards saving the dollar by massively driving up the price of oil, which is of course still quoted mainly in dollars.6 Energy and Capital editor Christian A. DeHaemer, an oil market analyst, commented: “The last oil price shock in the Middle East was in 1990 when the United States invaded Iraq for invading Kuwait. The price per barrel of oil went from $21 to $28 on August 6… to $46 by mid-October. The looming Iran War is not priced in,” he warned in his newsletter. Iran has the third-highest oil reserves in the world and is second only to Saudi Arabia in production. If any action prevents the flow of Iranian oil, the price of “black gold” would soar, he added.’ (

Playing The Arabs Against The Iranians

One important prerequisite for US aggression grows out of the Trilateral group’s strategy, starting from the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group of 2006, of forming a block of the Sunni Arab nations against the Persian-speaking Iranian Shiites and their allies in the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas, as well as Syria. The Anglo-American hope for this tactic of divide and conquer is that hostility between Arabs and Persians will eclipse the more recent enmity between Jews and Arabs. “The Jews and Arabs have been fighting for one hundred years. The Arabs and the Persians have been going at (it) for a thousand,” wrote Jeffrey Goldberg on The Atlantic’s website.8

With many reports that the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are ready to support the US aggression, great importance must be attached to the current struggle over the future shape of the government of Iraq. Here The secular Shiite Allawi is a US puppet, while his rival Maliki prefers Iran. Sadr and his Mahdi army, closely linked to Iran, represent a key stumbling block for US intentions. The US requires an Iraqi puppet state which will pursue at least a pro-US neutrality in case of war, and above all prevent Iranian special forces or guerrillas from cutting the long US supply line alone Route Tampa from Kuwait City. This is why the question of the Iraqi government was so important that Vice President Biden had to make a special trip to Iraq in the vain hope of quickly setting up a suitable puppet regime there. If the Iraq army turns against US, the situation of US forces could become extraordinarily critical.

War Warnings, Calls For War

Over recent days, warnings about imminent war and direct calls for war have been proliferating in the world media. The veteran Cuban leader Fidel Castro gave his most detailed media interview since the beginning of his illness several years ago, apparently for the express purpose of issuing a warning about US aggressive plans for Iran, and also for North Korea (DPRK). According to a wire dispatch of July 12, ‘the 83-year-old former president talked about how tension between the United States and both North Korea and Iran could ultimately trigger a global nuclear war …. Castro warned that an attack on Iran would be catastrophic for America. “The worst (for America) is the resistance they will face there, which they didn’t face in Iraq,” he said.’

On July 11, the former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad stated that ‘the US compelled the UN Security Council to impose sanctions against Iran in order to weaken the country and lay the ground for a military attack. The former Malaysian premier added, “It is a matter of time before the war criminals in Israel and the United States launch another war of aggression, once Iran has been weakened by sanctions.”’ 10

Around the same time, former Senator Chuck Robb and former NATO deputy commander General Charles Wald issued an editorial call for the US to begin preparing an attack. Their argument was that the fourth round of economic sanctions extorted by the United States from UN Security Council on June 9 would never be effective, and that military action had to be geared up in parallel to these sanctions. They also warned that the Cold War doctrine of deterrence would not work in regard to Iran: ‘Absent a broader and more robust strategy, however, sanctions alone will prove inadequate to halt Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons…current trends suggest that Iran could achieve nuclear weapons capability before the end of this year, posing a strategically untenable threat to the United States. Contrary to a growing number of voices in Washington, we do not believe a nuclear weapons-capable Iran could be contained…. We cannot afford to wait indefinitely to determine the effectiveness of diplomacy and sanctions. Sanctions can be effective only if coupled with open preparation for the military option as a last resort. Indeed, publicly playing down potential military options has weakened our leverage with Tehran, making a peaceful resolution less likely. Instead, the administration needs to expand its approach and make clear to the Iranian regime and the American people: If diplomatic and economic pressures do not compel Iran to terminate its nuclear program, the U.S. military has the capability and is prepared to launch an effective, targeted strike on Tehran’s nuclear and supporting military facilities…. The stakes are too high to rely on sanctions and diplomacy without credibly preparing for a potential military strike as well.’ 11
The Neocons Promise A Cakewalk — Again!

One of the most blatant calls for war with Iran comes from the former CIA agent and neocon ideologue Reuel Marc Gerecht. The Weekly Standard, the central organ of the neocon warmonger party, devotes the cover story of its current issue to urging the Israelis to put an end to Obama’s dithering by mounting the attacks themselves, thus presenting the feckless tenant of the White House with a fait accompli.12

In the inimitable style of neocon Kenneth Adelman, who notoriously promised a cakewalk in Iraq the last time we went down this road, Gerecht impatiently dismisses a series of arguments against such a fateful act of incalculable folly, and does not miss the opportunity to settle accounts with Brzezinski, whose alternative model of imperialist management is now losing support within the ruling elite. Gerecht writes: ‘… concerns about an Israeli bombing are no more persuasive. Hezbollah would undoubtedly unleash its missiles on Israel after a preventive strike…. Hundreds of Israelis could die from Hezbollah’s new and improved store of missiles. Israel might have to invade Lebanon again, which would cost more lives and certainly upset the “international community.”…. The Obama administration might fume, but it is hard to imagine the president, given what he has said about the unacceptability of Iranian nukes, scolding Jerusalem long. He might personally agree with his one-time counsel, Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, that Israel has become a pariah state, but politically this won’t fly.’ 13 Three years ago, Brzezinski had the upper hand and the neocons were in disarray, but now the tables have been turned to a significant extent.

There is nothing to worry about, Gerecht assures us, since the Iranians are a paper tiger and the results will be a cakewalk: ‘American fear of Iranian capabilities in Iraq and Afghanistan has been exaggerated. The Americans are leaving Iraq; within a year, most of our troops are due to be gone….’ 14 Back in 2002-2003, the neocon line was that Saddam Hussein was so powerful that he had to be attacked. This time around, their field is reversed, and the main argument is that the Iranians need to be attacked because they are a pushover: ‘If the Iranians tried their mightiest, they could give us only a small headache compared with the migraine we’ve already got courtesy of the Pakistanis, who are intimately tied to Afghanistan’s Taliban. And the Israelis know the U.S. Navy has no fear of Tehran’s closing the Strait of Hormuz. If Khamenei has a death-wish, he’ll let the Revolutionary Guards mine the strait, the entrance to the Persian Gulf: It might be the only thing that would push President Obama to strike Iran militarily. Such an escalation could quickly leave Khamenei with no navy, air force, and army. The Israelis have to be praying that the supreme leader will be this addle-headed.’ 15 The tried and true ‘cakewalk’ argument is neither the first nor the last notorious neocon trick which is being brought back these days.

But what about the awesome threat of Iranian state-sponsored terrorism, the danger which these same neocons have been incessantly harping on for the past decade? No problem, says Gerecht. All we would need to do at that point is to issue a bloodcurdling thermonuclear ultimatum to Iran about incinerating that country with nuclear missiles, perhaps killing tens of millions of Iranians. As a matter of fact, Gerecht suggests, the US had better start issuing this sort of threat right now, without any further dithering: ‘It is entirely possible that Khamenei would use terrorism against the United States after an Israeli strike. That is one of the supreme leader’s preferred methods of state action, which is why he should not be permitted a nuclear weapon. The correct response for the United States is to credibly threaten vengeance. President Obama might be obliged to make such a threat immediately after an Israeli surprise attack; whether the Iranians would believe it, given America’s record, is more difficult to assess.’ 16 Note carefully that these statements amounts to the public advocacy of aggressive war, a behavior which may run afoul of the Nuremberg precedents of 1945.

The Iranians are crazy, says Gerecht, so the old-fashioned nuclear deterrence of Mutually Assured Destruction will never work. There is no point in wasting time any longer, and it is time for the Israeli missiles and bombers to fly: ‘‘It is possible the Israelis have waited too long to strike. Military action should make a strategic difference….If we’re not at the end of the road, then the Israelis probably should waste no more time. Khamenei is still weak. He’s more paranoid than he’s ever been. The odds of his making uncorrectable mistakes are much better than before. Any Israeli raid that could knock out a sizable part of Iran’s nuclear program would change the dynamic inside Iran and throughout the Middle East…..Unless Jerusalem bombs, the Israelis will soon be confronting a situation without historical parallel…. In the best case scenario, if things were just “normal” in Tehran, Israel would likely be confronting Cuban Missile Crisis-style brinkmanship on a routine basis.

De Borchgrave: Obama Wants Three Wars And Both Houses Of Congress

The veteran columnist Arnaud de Borchgrave offers the following estimate, which gives considerable attention to the US military opposition against the coming strike, as well as to Iranian capabilities for retaliation in the region: ‘A former Arab leader, in close touch with current leaders, speaking privately not for attribution, told this reporter July 6, “All the Middle Eastern and Gulf leaders now want Iran taken out of the nuclear arms business and they all know sanctions won’t work.” The temptation for Obama to double down on Iran will grow rapidly as he concludes that Afghanistan will remain a festering sore as far as anyone can peer into a murky future, hardly a recipe for success at the polls in November. With a war in Afghanistan that is bound to get worse and a military theater in Iraq replete with sectarian violence, the bombing of Iran may give Obama a three-front war — and a chance to retain both houses of Congress. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also expressed reservations from time to time. The Joint Chiefs and former CENTCOM commanders know better than most experts that Iran has formidable asymmetrical retaliatory capabilities. For example, all of these are vulnerable to Iranian sabotage or hundreds of Iranian missiles on the eastern side of the Gulf: from the narrow Straits of Hormuz, which still handles 25 percent of the world’s oil traffic; to Bahrain, the U.S. Fifth Fleet’s headquarters where the population is two-thirds Shiite and the royal family is Sunni; to Dubai, where about 400,000 Iranians live, including many who are “sleeper agents” or favorable to Tehran; to Qatar, now the world’s richest country with per-capita income at $78,000, which supplies the United States with the world’s longest runway and sub-headquarters for CENTCOM, and whose LNG facilities are within short missile range of Iran’s coastal batteries; to Saudi Arabia’s Ras Tanura, the world’s largest oil terminal, and Abqaiq, nerve center of Saudi’s eastern oil fields.

On The Eve Of A New False Flag Provocation?

Naturally, the traditional Anglo-American method for neutralizing any possible opposition from military leaders or members of Congress, to say nothing of the increasingly atomized US public, has been to stage a provocation along the lines of the Gulf of Tonkin in August 1964, or an event like 9/11, quickly followed by the appropriate congressional resolution which can be used in lieu of an actual declaration of war, as needed. Vernochet finds that these ingredients are really the only ones missing in the current constellation of forces to get military operations going in grand style.58 Vernochet estimates that the only possibility for stopping this war would be the creation of a large block of states led by Russia and China, and that this possibility seems very remote at the present time. But instead of seeing the denizens of Manhattan and the city of London as power crazed, it would be more accurate to regard them as living in mortal fear of their own imminent financial bankruptcy, and desperately seeking some way to convince the world that their empire of derivatives, zombie banks, and hedge funds actually represents the economic future of humanity.59 In the meantime, one thing which antiwar activists can unquestionably do is to begin inoculating public opinion to regard any terrorist act or military clash attributed by the mass media to Iran as a provocation deliberately staged by the US-UK war party.

US And Israeli Warships Mobilized

The US has recently deployed a second aircraft carrier battle group to waters near Iran. A large number of US warships, by some accounts 11 vessels, passed through the Suez Canal heading east towards the Gulf at the end of June. This was evidently the expanded battle group around the attack carrier USS Truman. An Israeli report says: ‘International agreements require Egypt to keep the Suez open even for warships, but the armada, led by the USS Truman with 5,000 sailors and marines, was the largest in years. Egypt closed the canal to fishing and other boats as the armada moved through the strategic passageway that connects the Red and Mediterranean Seas.’ 60 Some reports stated that an Israeli ship was part of the armada.

There are also reports that the Israeli Navy is expanding its operations into the Gulf: ‘Several defense websites have reported that Israel is deploying one to three German-made nuclear submarines in the Persian Gulf as a defensive measure against the possibility of a missile attacks from Lebanon and Syria, as well as Iran. “The submarines of Flotilla 7 — Dolphin, Tekuma and Leviathan — have visited the Gulf before,” DeHaemer wrote, “but the decision has now been taken to ensure a permanent presence of at least one of the vessels.”61 These submarines fire nuclear missiles, and could destroy Iranian cities. They cannot defend anything, but they can launch a nuclear first strike.

US Troops In Eleven Countries Encircle Iran

US forces currently operate in at least 11 countries within striking distance of Iran. These are Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, Pakistan, Kuwait, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Kyrgyzstan. While Manas Air Force base in Kyrgyzstan might be available for operations against Iran, there are currently no US bases in Uzbekistan, so far as is known. But the US is trying to re-open its Uzbek base, which was closed in 2005.62 Thus, US military forces are now present in virtually all of Iran’s neighbors, except Syria. Many of these are places which the US peace movement, to the extent that it has survived the coming of Obama, has never heard of. This includes more than 50,000 GIs in Iraq (where the US is now alone, after the departure of all coalition contingents) and Afghanistan, where there are some 100,000 US forces. There are US forces in various disguises in Pakistan. There are NATO bases, including the formidable Incirlik air base, in Turkey. Whether Turkey will allow its territory to be abused for aggression is another question.

Grifter's picture

Geo, not one of the junkers, but just a thought - why not apply for contributor status or go the Guest Post route where you can have your real identity attributed to the post?  And I say that as a fan of your work, if you are who I *think* you are...

Tyler(s) - apologies if this was already done on Geo's part & denied, didn't mean to stir up trouble...

geopol's picture

Don't let the junkers motivate you!!

TD is one of the good ones,,,If he denied me contributor status it wouldn't be relevent to the message I have...The message is the message,, If not of value...then.....

As a fan of my work,,,thank you so much,,Grifter






DocLogo's picture

webster, if I'm not mistaken, you wrote this back in July. Do you think the stuxnet story has changed anything? At least in terms of what an "attack" will look like.

AllegoryOfTheCave's picture

i thought the exact same thing, wow.

Anarchist's picture

Demographics will always trump your "facts". Minority backed governments always fall in the end. The Shia can absord huge losses and still be able to take power in countries they are the majority. The rump thiefdoms created by the British, French and Americans will be absorbed by their neighboring giants.

goldsaver's picture

Pay no attention to events on the ground as when an armed revolt comes to Bahrain and Kuwait it will be the dirty Jooos dressed in man dresses and head towels pretending to be Iranian. The wheel in the sky has dictated that a black swan event must be staged in order for Halliburton to set up new oil fields in the Phillipines and Iceland. Beware of the Black Swan. With sharp pointy teeth.

/sarcasm off

Max Hunter's picture

Awww... Looks like someone ran out of small animals to torcher and kill within a days walk..

Thanks for taking the time.

barkingbill's picture

are these thoughts or the calculations of neocon mad men wishing to destroy millions of souls for the sake of using the world as a chessboard...

zaknick's picture

Mr Tarpley, if it is you, I wanted you to know that ever since reading your Unauthorized Biography of George *HW* B@sh I have been very impressed with your work even though you did leave out a lot of juicy stuff ......but I guess you don't have a death wish. Your writings are like a beacon of truth amidst all the constant, fascist psy ops around us, manipulating all like the true Whore of Babylon that it is!

geopol's picture

even though you did leave out a lot of juicy stuff ...

And that would be...???:-)



spinone's picture

Don't cut and paste as if its yours, unless you are Webster Tarpley.


Just link to the article.

geopol's picture

I will post info for your debilitated capacity as I wish.. Your cut paste accusation is childish..and I have linked to stories many times on this site..

spinone's picture

My sincerest apologies, Mr. Tarpley.  I too am a great fan and admirer. 

I considered it unlikely that you were the poster, and more likely someone was pasting your work without attribution.

geopol's picture


Attribution is not my concern here at ZH, I have other outlets,,I'm trying to inform the best I can as ZH is worth my time,,

Apology is excepted,,with vigor,,,

Thanks My friend..


Village Idiot's picture

Mr.Tarpley, sir, you don't look anything like the picture you are posting of yourself on ZH. :-)

geopol's picture


My avatar is the absurdity,,,,

Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted.

fiddler_on_the_roof's picture

Grat Post. As this article says, best strategy for US  to protect dollar is by initiating a war. Petro dollars will be in huge demand. Even if US looses an eye, Iran/China/India will lose both eyes. "In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is King".

carbonmutant's picture

How 'bout the Cliff notes and a link?

geopol's picture

1 “Cheney Determined To Strike In US With WMD This Summer,” July 21, 2007, at

2 “THE KENNEBUNKPORT WARNING/ To the American people, and to peace loving individuals everywhere: Massive evidence has come to our attention which shows that the backers, controllers, and allies of Vice President Dick Cheney are determined to orchestrate and manufacture a new 9/11 terror incident, and/or a new Gulf of Tonkin war provocation over the coming weeks and months. Such events would be used by the Bush administration as a pretext for launching an aggressive war against Iran, quite possibly with nuclear weapons, and for imposing a regime of martial law here in the United States. We call on the House of Representatives to proceed immediately to the impeachment of Cheney, as an urgent measure for avoiding a wider and more catastrophic war. Once impeachment has begun, it will be easier for loyal and patriotic military officers to refuse illegal orders coming from the Cheney faction. We solemnly warn the people of the world that any terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction taking place inside the United States or elsewhere in the immediate future must be considered the prima facie responsibility of the Cheney faction. We urge responsible political leaders everywhere to begin at once to inoculate the public opinion of their countries against such a threatened false flag terror operation. (Signed) A Group of US Opposition Political Leaders Gathered in Protest at the Bush Compound in Kennebunkport, Maine, August 24-25, 2007” at


4  “Operation Bite – April 6 Sneak Attack By US Forces On Iran Planned, Russian Military Sources Warn,” March 25, 2007,

5 Roger McDermott, “Kremlin Contemplates a Seismic Shift in Russian Foreign Policy,” May 31, 2010,

6 ‘Sans oublier le scénario de basse intensité comportant la fermeture du détroit d’Ormuz… mais à y regarder de plus près, celle-ci ne ferait que retarder l’échéance d’une campagne (déjà planifiée) de frappes massives destinées à donner toutes ses chances aux forces intérieures œuvrant au renversement du régime. Le scénario « Ormuz » devant se révéler tout aussi impuissant à dissuader les attaquants potentiels… L’artère jugulaire d’Ormuz par laquelle transitent près de 30 % de la production mondiale des hydrocarbures nécessaires à faire tourner le moteur planétaire, fermée, un baril qui bondirait à 300 $ serait d’ailleurs une aubaine inespérée pour les Majors, le cartel des grandes Compagnies pétrolières, qui pourraient dès lors se lancer dans l’exploitation à haut coût des schistes et des sables bitumineux du Groenland et d’ailleurs ou se lancer dans d’aventureuses campagnes de forages en eaux profondes comme dans le golfe du Mexique et avec le « succès » que l’on sait.’ Jean-Michel Vernochet, “La guerre d’Iran aura-t-elle lieu?” Réseau Voltaire,

7 Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, ‘Iran is Surrounded by US Troops in 10 Countries,’ June 27, 2010.




11 ‘Sanctions alone won’t work on Iran,’ Washington Post, July 9, 2010,

12 Reuel Marc Gerecht, ‘Should Israel Bomb Iran?’, Weekly Standard, July 26, 2010






18 Michael Barone, ‘Rising speculation about bombing Iran’s nukes,’ San Francisco Examiner, July 21, 2010 at See also Jim Lobe, ‘Stirrings of a New Push for Military Option on Iran’, Inter Press Service, July 9, 2010, at

19 ‘ABC News Exclusive; The Secret War Against Afghanistan,” April 3, 2007, at


21 Tehran Times, July 18, 2010,

22 Iran could acquire nuke weapons capability – Medvedev,

23 Russia’s Medvedev says worried with U.S. intelligence data on Iran (Update-1),

24 Iran says Medvedev’s nuke remarks ‘divorced from reality’,

25 Russia up to date on Iranian nuclear developments – Medvedev,

26 S-300 missiles come under new UN sanctions on Iran – Kremlin source,

27 Russian-Iranian S-300 missile deal not against UN resolution — U.S.,

28 Russia rejects Iran’s claims it favors U.S. on nuclear issue ,

29 Turkey, Brazil not included in Iran Six talks – Lavrov,

30 Iran’s nuclear program still cause for concern – Russian envoy ,

31 Iran to load reactor in Sept. 2011 – nuclear chief,

32 ‘En ce qui concerne Moscou, cette décision semble bien refléter une certaine «schizophrénie» au sommet de l’État ou un bicéphalisme ouvertement divergent entre une Présidence a priori plus «occidentaliste» que ne le serait le Premier ministre Vladimir Poutine.’ Jean-Michel Vernochet, “La guerre d’Iran aura-t-elle lieu?” Réseau Voltaire,

33 See Webster G. Tarpley, “Towards the Eighteenth Brumaire of General David Petraeus?”, June 23, 2010, at

34 “New Iran Nuke NIE Still Not Ready,” Newsweek, June 28, 2010,

35 David E. Sanger, ‘U.S. Presses Its Case Against Iran Ahead of Sanctions Vote,’ New York Times, June 7, 2010 at


37 See Webster G. Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (Washington DC: EIR, 1992), pp. 320-325.

38 Michael Smith, “Blair planned Iraq war from start,” London Times, May 1, 2005.

39 See

40; see also

41 Gareth Porter, ‘Amiri Told CIA Iran Has No Nuclear Bomb Programme,’ IPS, July 19, 2010, at

42 This Week, June 27,




46 ‘U.A.E. diplomat mulls hit on Iran’s nukes,’ Washington Times, July 6, 2010,

47 Joe Kein, “An Attack on Iran: Back on the Table,”, July 15, 2010, at,8599,2003921,00.html; Time, July 26, 2010, p. 22.

48 Alexander Smoltczyk and Bernhard Zand, ‘Persian Isolation: A Quiet Axis Forms Against Iran in the Middle East,’ Spiegel Online, July 15, 2010, at,1518,706445,00.html

49 ‘The Arab World Against Ahmadinejad?,’ Huffington Post, July 6, 2010,

50 Hugh Tomlinson, ‘Saudi Arabia gives Israel clear skies to attack Iranian nuclear sites,’ London Times, June 12, 2010, at

51 Saudis give nod to Israeli raid on Iran, London Times, July 5, 2010,

52 ‘Verdict qui tombe après que l’Agence Guysen International News eut diffusé le 24 juin une information donnée pour être d’origine iranienne (!) suivant laquelle « … des avions israéliens auraient atterris sur l’aéroport saoudien de Tabouk les 18 et 19 juin dernier…C’est ce qu’a rapporté l’agence iranienne FARS dans un article intitulé “Activité militaire douteuse du régime sioniste en Arabie Saoudite.”’

53 France’s Sarkozy welcomes Russia’s support of new Iran sanctions,

54 China ready to strengthen diplomatic ties with Iran (Update), .

55 Joe Kein, “An Attack on Iran: Back on the Table,”, July 15, 2010, at,8599,2003921,00.html; Time, July 26, 2010, p. 22.


57 Arnaud de Borchegrave, ‘Global Sentiment Builds to Attack Iran,’ Newsmax, July 13, 2010,

58 ‘Il ne manque plus au tableau qu’un prétexte plausible, une provocation intervenant n’importe où dans le monde mais suffisamment spectacularisable pour frapper les opinions de sidération, cela, le temps nécessaire à lancer les premières frappes qui tétaniseront les oppositions en les prenant de court et enclencheront automatiquement l’escalade militaire.’

59 ‘Sauf par conséquent à ce que l’initiative tripartite ne soit reprise par une large coalition conduite par la Russie et la Chine, ce qui semble peu probable dans la conjoncture présente, le scénario du pire, sous les deux versions qui viennent d’être évoqués – frappes préventives, représailles, fermeture d’Ormuz – est en fait de plus en plus plausible. Et sauf une levée de bouclier internationale particulièrement nette et ferme, La guerre de Troie aura bien lieu si les dieux assoiffés de puissance qui siègent dans l’île de Manhattan et règnent sur la Cité de Londres s’accordent entre eux et en décident ainsi. Il restera aux stratèges de décider s’ils frappent directement la Perse, ou s’ils font éclater un conflit à sa marge, pour l’y précipiter et l’y détruire.’ Jean-Michel Vernochet, “La guerre d’Iran aura-t-elle lieu?” Réseau Voltaire,

60 ‘US, Israel Warships in Suez May Be Prelude to Faceoff with Iran,’ June 20, 2010,

61 Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, Iran is Surrounded by US Troops in 10 Countries, June 27, 2010.

62 Ann Gearan and Robert Burns, ‘Uzbekistan Being Considered By US As Backup Air Base,’ Huffington Post, February 5, 2009, at

63 Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, ‘Reports: IAF Landed at Saudi Base, US Troops near Iran Border,’ June 23, 2010,

64 ‘Militarization of the Caucasus: Tehran Says it will Oppose Deployment of American Forces in Karabakh close to Iran Border,’

65 Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, ‘Iran is Surrounded by US Troops in 10 Countries,’ June 27, 2010.

66 This danger is not new; see Webster G. Tarpley, ‘US Could Face Catastrophic Military Defeat In Iraq – What Baker And Hamilton Forgot,’ December 17, 2006, at

67 Uzi Mahnaimi, ‘Israel warns Syria over Hezbollah attacks,’ London Times, April 18, 2010, at

68 David Moon, ‘Amid war talk, arms buildup continues,’ Asia Times, July 20, 2010, at

69 David Moon, ‘Amid war talk, arms buildup continues,’ Asia Times, July 20, 2010, at

70 For Cheney’s Iraq war campaign kickoff speech of August 27, 2002, see

71 For the reality-based community, see Ron Suskind, ‘Faith, Certainty, and the Presidency of George W. Bush,’ New York Times, October 17, 2004,




StychoKiller's picture

So, I guess the answer to Rodney Knig's question is:  "Not only no, but Hell NO!"

doolittlegeorge's picture

whoa!  war started thru long-windedness.

Turd Ferguson's picture

And then there is this...from your friends in The Mossad:

GoinFawr's picture

Excellent work geo, thanks. It's nice to read something that length and not feel as if someone owes you 20 minutes of your life back; indeud rather the opposite. Well done.

From the lack of contrary replies I can only assume that the junkers were so in awe of your piece that they were struck dumb; or I suppose it could be that they were just born that way.

Warmest Regards

geopol's picture


A well fomulated response,,,clues me in on your intelect...BRAVO..We need more...


stollcri's picture

A comment that long really deserves its own post. I know this site is meant to be dedicated to finance [doesn't everything ultimately come back to money], but maybe its time for the ZH team to branch out and make sister sites that highlight these topics (e.g Gawker media)?

Good work.

geopol's picture

ZH is ZH,,,,,It provides the best financial and global interest landscape I can think of....TD never takes the offramp on geopolitical issues when they financially have impact...I'm grateful for that...



Optimusprime's picture

Thanks for the timely warning--ignore the Mossad agent junkers.  Keep up the great work!

Things that go bump's picture

My dear sir, I really must tell you how much I appreciate your contributions to the discussions here, especially those like the one above, that provide a depth of analysis that would otherwise be unavailable to me.  I am in your debt.  

Moonrajah's picture

Geopol, a big thank you for this comprehensive outlook on the different forces brewing in the current war-pot. Sickening to say the least. 

Regarding your idea about the other 'check and balance' being Russia and China. You take Russia out of the picture since you see a more loyal model expressed by Medvedev. Do you think that premier Putin (whom many see as the gray cardinal) can make his move toward establishing a more pro-Iranian stance once the feces hits the turbine?

And what about China? We see that it is starting to flex its muscles more and more. Will it back down when it sees it's biggest supplier of oil and gas (and thus a source of its indepence in a way) being overtaken by the anglo-american corporates?

Bob's picture

Fabulous work, Geo, much appreciated! 

Like Grifter, I think it deserves to be--and would be more appropriate as--a stand-alone post . . . Can't help but wonder: What's up here?  The vast majority of "Contributor" and Guest posts are thin gruel compared to Geo's work.  Not trying to cause trouble, but it doesn't seem to make sense.

masterinchancery's picture

I thought the attack had already occurred, and Stuxnet had carried the field.

goldmiddelfinger's picture

Yeah, but where's the humiliation?

rapacious rachel wants to know's picture
rapacious rachel wants to know (not verified) masterinchancery Sep 27, 2010 6:52 PM

AND! rendered military intervention obsolete