The Oil Drum

ac-130's moved to iraq bases.
http://www.sunherald.com/mld/cctimes/news/world/14016966.htm?source=rss&channel=cctimes_world

I do not rule out Israeli or US air strikes against presumed Iranian nuclear resources but even that is quite unlikely (maximum risk from June onwards, probability < 25% this year IMO).

My assessment would change if, say, Venezuela stopped oil exports to US but Hugo is wise enough to know that card is best in sleeve than on table.

"What people need to hear loud and clear is that we're running out of energy in America."
--George W. Bush, May 2001

He tried, the titbabies cried, and IF he tried hared the titbabies would have accused him of making it all up for Big oil buddies etc.

People will ALWAYS find evidence to support their pet fantasy.

That could simply be like you say, for controling insurgents in Iraq (curb break-out of civil war).  OR it could be "just in case" too for extra-curriculars for later (or sooner than expected even ???).

But, we just git to sit and watch.  Got Popcorn?

That said, there are people in the U.S. government who have Iran and its oil in their sights.

Borrow an ICBM from the Russians and point it directly at Tel Aviv. That will put a quick end to the imperial visions of the Neocons. It will be checkmate, game over.

The nuclear issue is one excuse for military action, the backup seems to be the allegations of IED manufacture and interference in Iraq.

As in the Downing Street Memos ( www.downingstreetmemo.com ), the facts are being fixed around the policy.

How's that for cynical?

However, having said all that, being a base for terrorist mullahs and their evil talk and actions, well that is what is ultimately making Iran #1 on the list of countries for power-down. We'll at some point tip our friends "the Rooskies" to bug out of Bushy and then put the country quite literally into the dark ages. My guess is that neither the U.S. nor Israel wants to kill large numbers of Russians, and so my query is, when are those guys going to go home? Russians are not dumb; my guess is they have their bags packed.

I recon Iran will be attacked and they'll try regime change. I really hope I'm wrong, but the signals coming out of the White House are very discouraging. I just hope the attack is relatively modest and the results are containable. Iran should fight a defensive war and under no circumstances give the Bush administration any excuse to use nuclear weapons. Personally I think they would really like to use a few nukes on Iran. This would have an enormous symbolic and psychological "value" in the region as a whole. In a way nuclear weapons have lost their "value" because no one really believes they can be used, especially against a non-nuclear enemy. This is, of course very speculative, but I think it's important to remember that both Britain and the United States did threaten Iraq with a limited nuclear strike in the run-up to the invasion. So it's not that far out. The Romans also kept discipline in their Empire by ruthless use of military to punish provinces that were in revolt, by levelling towns and cities and selling whole populations in slavery. I suppose ultra violence is part of the logic of Empire.

Personally, I see Iran's recently elected president as fully representing the not-elected mullahs.  The combination of stating that Israelis should be moved to Europe and/or Israel should be destroyed, with a program intended to develop nukes, is not acceptable to Israel. The US sees Israel as the only democratic state in the region - notwithstanding the recent free elections in the west bank - and is anyway committed to Israel's defense, both by history and us politics. Meanwhile, the sitting us president is the most belligerant we have ever had and he previously defined Iran as an axis of evil charter member. And, this president has little fear of Iran's main weapon, withholding its oil, because the resulting rise in oil prices will be quietly welcomed by his oil patch backers. Pretty explosive mixture.

As an aside, while some of Iran's neighbors do have nukes, none of them have threatened to destroy another country, and anyway the persian gulf is so far a nuclear free zone. None of Iran's Sunni arab neighbors would like to see the Shia Persians with nukes. If Iran's nuclear facilities were bombed, there would be quiet celebrations throughout the region, save only, perhaps, the Shias in southern Iraq.

This has nothing to do with Iranians either in or outside of Iran. California, where I live, has, I think, the largest number of Iranians living here outside of Iran.

This is about their government. Remember, just for starts, it has four parts. The executive, the judicial, and the parliament AND the theocratic. The leader of Iran is Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Hoseini-KHAMENEI who is head of state, the President serves him.

1. a few weeks back the Shites of Iran were killing Sufi's (the whirling dervishes of old) in the holy city of Qom.
   
2. God forbid you be openly of the bahai faith in Iran. Death sentence.
   
3. the government as been trying to make the 22-24% population that are Azeri's into Persians - kind of what the Turks were trying to do with the Kurds all through the 70's and 80's.
   
4. You can not run for Parliament unless you are cleared by the clergy. I'd like to see that tried in the USA or EU.
   
5. and for foreign policy, where do we want to go? Eliminate Israel, by nuclear fire if need be? Or just sanction suicide bombers to kill women and children?
   
6. and look at the Iranian Govt. close allies. Those sterling nations Syria and North Korea.
   
7. If Iran goes nuclear, than who is next? SA? Turkey has been dusting off their nuclear plans from the Cold War of late.

There are some good reasons why the USA and Israel do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons!