Oh, they'll find "new hard evidence". I will bet my mother's life on it (sorry, Mom!). If there's one thing Cheney finds, it's "hard evidence" for anything he wants.

What? He's rolling out a new product in August? What would Andy Card say?
And what a great distraction it would be. Gonzales off the front page. New excuses for executive privelege cuz we're "at war". Surge troops in Iraq with a new mission.
Watch out for the false flag.

On p. 15 of the briefing that you link to is a photo of a so-called Iranian warhead dated "5-31-2006". I doubt that the US DOD uses the Month-Day-Year format, let alone the Iranians.

Maybe it is the light in the photo but "Lot: 5-31-2006" looks freshly painted to me.

This is not the only time that it appears the DOD faked photos. I linked to a Defend America story below about refurbished Hungarian tanks being delivered to an Iraqi army base in the week ending 11/14/05.

But, according to a series of articles in Defense Industry Daily, the 72 refurbished tanks were still sitting on a ship offshore in Kuwait when the Defend America article was published because of a payment dispute with the vendor, Defense Solutions LLC.

I suspect the photos in the Defend America story were training tanks painted to appear to be the refurbished ones.

"...suspected training camps in Iraq run by the Quds force..."

This is confusing to me. Why and how would there be Iranian training camps in Iraq?

IMHO, the only way to short-circuit this Iranian insanity is to shine a white-hot spotlight on this:

www.asecondlookatthesaudis.com

It's not just that these idiots want to invade yet another country that had nothing to do with 9/11. It's that they refuse to lift a finger against those who truly are responsible, and our troops in Iraq are paying for that treasonous policy with their lives as we speak.

In discussing this issue, we ought to be careful to distinguish between air strikes on Quds camps within Iraq and strikes on such camps within Iran. Such camps in Iraq might be able to be destroyed without sparking a new international incident. If they exist, Iran cannot acknowledge their existence and cannot take defensive action based on their destruction. I am against escalation on the facts available to us (even if the administration's version of the facts is true), but I think I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with eliminating the camps in Iraq and then actually policing the border (which should have been done from the start). The McClatchy story slides from the camps in Iraq to the camps in Iran, much as we might expect the administration to. That is, we have every reason to think that this incompetent bunch would fail to discern a distinction between the two and launch air strikes indiscriminately, thereby creating yet another front in the so-called GWOT when we can barely handle the ones we face now.

Impeachment is off the table, we gave them carte blanche and immunity on spying, subpoenas are ignored with impunity, torture is accepted with a wink and a nod. What do we expect? These assholes get everything they want, and they want another war. What's to stop them.

Surely those who favor sitting idly by until 2009, assuming the Dems capture huge margins in Congress as well as the White House, won't object to this either.

"Don't worry, nothing we can do about it, not enough votes. Focus on the election. We'll fix everything later."

Surrender monkeys indeed. We have surrendered to the madmen ruinning (and ruining) our country.

Has anything this guy says ever been correct?Or truthful?Or logical?
Why does he get and attention at all?
We we saying earlier this guy has lived with and hung out with the exact same gang for 35+ years.
These guys sell guns and bombs.That's their thing.
They sell war products.
That's how they think.
Who can we blow up next?
Yes!code is "profit" That would be correct.

Posted by: Adam in Atlanta

Adam, I respect your attempt at thoughtfulness, but remember the story of the little boy who cried wolf. Trust nothing these liars do or say. If you want to trust your leaders again, find some you can trust. Impeachment is the only answer. Believe in that, not in them.

I hope people don't think that Seymour Hersh missed the mark when he predicted war with Iran by June of this year. I suspect his reporting is one of the few things that has prevented this war from happening. Transparency is dangerous to people who plan everything (including FEMA disaster plans) in secret. On issues like a war with Iran, we all need to be Seymour Hershes.

^
Official A, I'm with you 100%.

What are we waiting for, folks?! Have we not suffered these malfeasant fools long enough?

As the President himself once famously mangled: Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Are we going to fall for this same trick again? "Oh, there are some bad people over here, too. See, they did this bad thing (I can prove it with this "intelligence" I manufactured). Let's invade their country!"

If Watergate was a cancer on the Presidency, this administration is an autoimmune disease for the entire republic.

Impeachment is the cure.

-- ARG

What are we waiting for, folks?! Have we not suffered these malfeasant fools long enough?...Impeachment is the cure. -- ARG

September 15, Washington, DC. We need at least a million protesters on the ground to instill the fear of We the People in them. Be there.

Oh dear. Can TPM start up something like the "Security Level" colors, with Green meaning that Cheney is under heavy sedation and safely away from any levers of power, and Red meaning that Cheney has finally decided that Iran is responsible for his "loss of essence" and needs to be nuked?

If Gates and Rice are on the "other" side of Cheney's efforts on Iran, when will Mr. Gates show his character by threatening to resign (or resigning)? Obviously, Ms. Rice will remain to loyal to the end. Unlike Mr. Powell who had an opportunity in the past to stop the Iraq insanity by resigning over similar fundamental differences with Bush/Cheney, does Mr. Gates have the strength of character to say no by leaving over Iran?

Adam in Atlanta

I feel ya. But remember, GW and Dick had a woody for Iraq from the day they entered the White House. They were just looking for an excuse (or cover as 9/11 turned out to be) and they gave no thought to the consequences, so here we are.

Iran was next on their list on day one of their sitting behind those large exquisite desks in the White House. What makes anyone think that they're just looking for the smallest justification to go in there, despite the consequences.

So here we are....

Don't worry, we will have our hard evidence soon enough. Bush is on vacation and calling for corportate tax cuts - exactly what he was doing in August 2001, before the last "hard evidence" appeared.

"they are not a force for good"--[therefore a force for EVIL].

President spoke, VP makes it happen.

It goes like this:
Attack Iran while congress is out (too many home press benefits to count)--distract: worry about contempt of congress while we expand the war???

We feared Iran's nuclear threat, so while we were at aerial attacks on the camps, we also took out their nuclear facilities with "surgical strikes."

Malaki dissappears, turmoil in Iraq increases: need more surging troops....
"See, it wasn't a political problem in Iraq, it was a military one."

We "surge" Iran to help those poor people get a decent government, just like we helped the Iraqis.

Congress? What Congress.

HermanNewticks, I agree that attacking QUD sponsored forces in Iraq is on the table, but why is striking Iran acceptable and Pakistan not? I mean ergo: both nation states harbor groups (minorities) that seek to attack US personnel and interests.

I guess what I find interesting is the 'portrayal' of the EFPs (explosively formed penetrators) as some new advanced and high-tech weapon, "as if it were literally jumping up off of the microscope slide."

EFP's and their understanding go back to spiking cannon and the American Civil war when the Monroe effect was first studied.

www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/bullets2-shaped-charge.htm

RPG's, Law Rockets, and all sorts of weapons use this phenomenon and have done so for well over 100 years to differing degrees of success.

As a means to deflect blame, responsibility, and outrage to the high number of IED's I almost wonder if this is similar to Pat Tilghman going out in a blaze of thunder or Jessica Lynch taking on the entire QUD force, (which account she at least refuted.)

The desire to use 'bunker busters' which are also "Monroe Effect" ordinance in Iran to pre-emptively disrupt the nuclear programme is a grave consideration to more than just the VPOTUS.

While the 'spin' and the 'rhetoric' from sources seem alarming, I'm guessing after some of the previous policies and ideas from a unique brand of Republicans, NEOCONS: that 'cooler heads' are considering the unintended consequences of purely political mouthing....

The question is this, do we really want to attack a country of 70 million Persians if there is a 'small group' within that country acting in Non-US interests? Did we have to do it in Afghanastan? Did we have to do it in Iran? And do we want to do it in Pakistan?

http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-08-10-voa24.cfm

Given a vote?

Lets decide carefully whom we want to bomb next.

If your only tool is an army....

every diplomatic solution looks like a war

Wanted: pretty good forgeries. pointing to skullduggery by iran. possibly coming from africa. perniciousness/secrecy highly rewarded.

Does the old AUMF authorize going into Iran? Wouldn't Bush need a new one for Iran?

Or it that what all the Executive Orders are about?

ExxonMobil is making historic profits.

And after we finish blowing these places up and putting Saddam II into power - we will be awaraded all the significant reconstruction projects.

Bush is eliminating terrorists, securing more oil for ExxonMobil to sell to us in the future, and generating jobs for out-of-work "economic hit men".

Be patient....this will all start trickling-down to us at some point.

So either go enlist or start helping Mitt or get out of the way.

&

Thanks, Official A, for the tip about September 15. I hadn't heard about the march yet. I googled it, and learned a lot. I think I can make it to DC on the 15th. (See you there!)

And I agree with "anon, too", above. I think you sell us short, Homeless. Middle Eastern oil is important, but the Iraq oil, per se, will not directly affect our quality of life. (We're actually getting almost no oil from Iraq now -- nobody is.)

I would gladly see gas at $6 per gallon, rather than this imperial war we're in. Plus, didn't you notice that the war actually made the price of oil go UP, not DOWN?!

Impeachment now. Else we'll all be homeless.

"Moonlight sleeping on a midnight lake."

-- ARG

I have to agree with Larry Birnbaum in his comment but I'll go a little further. The issue is a strike IN IRAQ, not IN IRAN. While knowingly striking Iranian forces in IRAQ may cause some conflict, it is a war zone. If they are there, they are at risk. If it is consistent with our military objectives IN IRAQ, then a strike is reasonable, perhaps even called for.

A direct strike against IRAN, implied in the headlines is neither reasonable nor called for.

I'm a big fan of TPM and Muckraker, largely because of your credibility. Misleading headlines and twisted facts will quickly relegate you the vast pool of indistinguishable partisan blogs. You guys are better than this.

"If the middle east sources of oil supply is so minimal why do so many characterize our continued presence in that region as a strategic imperative to maintain access to energy?"

Um, because they're uninformed? Nevertheless, the argument is legitimately put forward that maintaining the free flow of oil world-wide, whoever the consumer is, is important to our national interest. But it's a bit more complicated than your original post suggested.

This is why CHENEY went to Saudia Arabia to get his marching orders from the Real Pres. of the USA... The Saudi King. They're Sunni and all of a sudden we're ARMING the Sunni in IRAQ, selling $20 Billion in advanced arms to the Kingdom... and CHENEY wants to attack IRAQ for HIS KING!

Bush/Cheney aren't running the country... The Saudi Family is!

WAKE UP!!!

PS: Colin Powell WHERE EVER YOU ARE... you CAN help STOP this IRANian WAR... SPEAK UP NOW!!!

Maybe it's finally time to IMPEACH [before it's too late...?]

ARG in Chicago:

You worry that Cheney could end up being "elected" President. Well, stop worrying about _that_, and start worrying about this:

The 22nd Amendment does not forbid a man to be elected more than twice as _Vice_ President. All Cheney has to do is head up the GOP nominee's VP search team, and reluctantly conclude that the best choice is ... Dick Cheney! Having tasted the power inherent in the 4th branch of government (especially when the titular head of the 2nd branch is an emppty suit) Cheney will be loath to take a demotion down to POTUS :-)

Cheney wins this easily. He studied at Nixon's knee. Anybody remember the severe escalation of turmoil when Nixon came on the T.V. and announced the massive bombing of supply lines in Cambodia? Same deal here different war. AIPAC is running interference this time and Pelosi, Reid-dick,Obama,Edwards,Clinton will be on the bandwagon pounding the war drums.

A done deal. Israel can be expected to join in or initiate. FISA debacle recently was a nice political dry run for them. They don't even need the semblance of another 9/11. They can just go in and the chimp will come on the tube to announce the operation. The junta is in complete control. Does anyone seriously think the Media will investigate the whys? They will cover the hows 24/7 and be elated with all the excitement and ratings it generates. Does anyone seriously beleive that Cheney will leave office before achieving his supreme wish, the one about real men moving on Teheran? Idiots on the Left keep foregetting to listen to what these people say. They have said many,many times that they create their own reality. End of Subject. Period. No need for nuanced discussions. Nuanced discussions are for idiots who still after 7 years of this beleive that we live in a 'democratic republic' with 'checks and balances'. Yeah,right. And I am sleeping with Jessica Alba.

Cheney's penile implant is now on full pump. He has a permanent,artifical woodie for Iran and who is going to stop him, Wolf Blitzer. The only thing that amazes is the willingness of plebians to remain in denial about how all this works after being bludgeoned over the head with it repeatedly. Even on this site seemingly intelligent people are sympathizing with the old saw argument that Iran is helping kill our troops and meddling in 'our war'. Does anyone,anyone read history. A guy named Hitler accused the hapless Poles of persecuting their local German population and staging incursions into greater Germany. He said the same about the Czechs the year before and about the Austrians before that. How incredibly stupid people are.

Hats off to Cheney. He knows how stupid people are and doesn't hide his contempt. Why should he? Stupid is as stupid does. This round as most all rounds goes to Cheney. Face it. Live with it. Deal with it. Ain't no Republic, no way.

What seems to be missing from this entire debate is what the Saudis are up to in helping to arm the Sunnis in Iraq. Why are they never mentioned as am equal, if not greater, threat to stability in Iraq and as responsible for the deaths of so many of our soldiers? Oh yeah, I forgot, they're our ally.

And why is this being rekindled in August? Could it be because Congress is on vacation?