October 28, 2012 (TSR) – The US government has intelligence reports that Israel is planning a pre-emptive strike on Iran in order to throw the US presidential election to Mitt Romney.
America’s political response is to stage one of the largest naval exercises in history is taking place near the Straits of Hormuz, the “choke point” on the Persian Gulf where Iran is capable of shutting off 35% of the world’s oil.
The fragile western economy would shatter immediately were Hormuz blockaded due to military action.
Netanyahu is blackmailing the west, threatening to “crash” their currencies and destroy their economies.
In addition, it was reported in The Guardian that Britain has denied use of her bases in Cyprus, Diego Garcia and the Ascension Islands along with existing bases in the United Kingdom by the United States if any plan to enter into a pre-emptive attack on Iran is suggested.
Ministry officials have informed Prime Minister Cameron that an attack on Iran would represent a “war crime” and would be inconsistent with International Law. From today’s Guardian: “Military action not right course”, Downing Street says.
Britain has rebuffed US pleas to use military bases in the UK to support the build-up of forces in the Gulf, citing secret legal advice, which states that any pre-emptive strike on Iran could be in breach of international law.
The US approaches are part of contingency planning over the nuclear standoff with Tehran, but British ministers have so far reacted coolly.
They have pointed US officials to legal advice drafted by the attorney general’s office, which has been circulated to Downing Street, the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defense.
This makes clear that Iran, which has consistently denied it has plans to develop a nuclear weapon, does not currently represent “a clear and present threat”. Providing assistance to forces that could be involved in a pre-emptive strike would be a clear breach of international law, it states.”
“The UK would be in breach of international law if it facilitated what amounted to a pre-emptive strike on Iran,” said a senior Whitehall source. “It is explicit. The government has been using this to push back against the Americans.”
Similarly, this week, Russia announced that it has found Iran’s nuclear program as entirely peaceful and will block any efforts to authorize the use of force against Iran:
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday that there is “absolutely no evidence” that Iran has decided to include a military component in its nuclear program, RIA Novosti reported.
Speaking during an interview with the Russian daily Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Lavrov also said that his country will scuttle any UN Security Council resolution that could be interpreted as authorizing military action against Iran.
“As the Libyan experience has shown, sadly, a military scenario is possible,” Lavrov stated when asked whether Israel or the United States could start military operations in Iran.
Russia will therefore exercise an extremely cautious approach at the UN Security Council, he added.
“We won’t allow any more such disingenuous interpretations. We will see to it that no resolution is open to interpretation like the one on Libya,” Lavrov stated.
A day later, Lavrov was joined by Swiss Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter who indicated that Switzerland opposes sanctions against Iran and is willing to work closely with Russia to prevent an escalation in the region.
American politics and plans for Israeli expansionism into Syria and Iraq are at the heart of conflict with Iran’s capabilities representing the balance of power in the region. Extremists in Israel believe Obama, in a second term, is unlikely to support Israel despite his recent promises.
Romney has been losing ground in Ohio despite attempts to misrepresent his political strength and without Ohio; Romney stands no chance of winning.
Only a war, perhaps a world war can save Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu believes Israel is doomed if there is another four years of Obama presidency.
In order to attempt to control Israeli aggression, President Obama has agreed to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu. Britain recently sent Sir John Sawyers, head of MI-6 to try to convince Netanyahu of the futility of his stated objectives.
The Israeli strike had been planned to be launched from Azerbaijan but diplomatic efforts from Tehran have “closed that door” on Israeli aggression. It is said that two squadrons of American built F-15 and F-16’s returned to Israel over Georgia and Turkey, then off the Syrian coast to Israel, being refueled by American air tankers.
A shorter route over Iraq or Armenia, perhaps even Syria may have had serious consequences.
This leaves Israel the only option of flying directly over Saudi Arabia. Any other path, Turkey, Iraq, the 4500-mile “open sea” route are unlikely.
Turkey had recent talks with Iran, has supported Iran in her efforts to end the nuclear stalemate and is unwilling to be seen as a NATO “doormat” for Israel’s expansionism against Islam.
Similarly, Iraq has had recent talks with Iran, and has added to her air defense capabilities with a $4 billion order for advanced Russian weaponry, both air defense and advanced combat aircraft.
Though Iran has claimed to have significantly improved her existing air defense system, rumors in the defense community support the supposition that Russia has delivered S400 systems to Iran, though not in significant numbers, enough to down, with absolute certainty, any Israeli or other plane, even ballistic or cruise missiles, that approach Iran though hundreds of miles away.
The critical issue to the current naval exercise which includes three American carrier battle groups is the attempt to impress upon Iran that her anti-ship missile defenses can be overwhelmed by massive airpower.
The issue has nothing to do with Israel, as reports on the attack profile planned by Israel indicate that they have chosen a “soft profile.”
This means that Israel has no plans to attack heavily defended facilities as aircraft and pilot losses are certain. Israel feels its political objective can be accomplished by attacking rural and even abandoned areas with no targets of value and little or no air defense in depth.
This is the same tack that Israel chose in their two attacks on Syria, in 2003 and 2007, attacking open desert and claiming propaganda victories. No actual targets were destroyed as Syria, since 1996 has had a non-export S300 advanced air defense system capable of destroying any missiles or aircraft currently in Israel’s or even America’s inventory.
The September 2007 “missile base attack” is supposed to have taken place in the middle of Turkish sponsored peace talks between Israel and Syria, attacks on a base manned entirely by Russian personnel, and, as such, a totally imaginary attack. This is the nature of “War by Deception.”
As the 25 nation exercise ends, and the thousands of Marines and Special Forces return home, happy they are unlikely to face Iran’s 800,000-man army and 13 million ready reserves, Iran, herself, is planning a naval exercise.
The Iranian exercises will test 3,600 defensive locations in order to test integration capabilities between air defense and the ability to respond to acts of aggression.
A British defense source is quoted:
“If it came to war, there would be carnage. The Iranian casualties would be huge but they would be able to inflict severe blows against the US and British.
The Iranian Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) is well versed in asymmetrical warfare and would use swarm attacks to sink or seriously damage ships. This is a conflict nobody wants, but the rhetoric from Israel is unrelenting.”
It is not just Iran that is concerned about attacks. Military forces within the United States have been on high alert for the past several weeks, though no reasons have been given. A “9/11” style attack, most likely on Washington, could be expected if a need to blame “Islamic extremists” is seen as the only way to support Israel’s territorial ambitions in the Sinai, West Bank, Syria and Iraq.
AUTHOR: Gordon Duff
Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, a combat infantryman, and Senior Editor at Veterans Today. His career has included extensive experience in international banking along with such diverse areas as consulting on counter insurgency, defense technologies or acting as diplomatic representative for UN humanitarian and economic development efforts. Gordon Duff has traveled to over 80 nations. His articles are published around the world and translated into a number of languages. He is regularly on TV and radio, a popular and sometimes controversial guest.