Skip to content or view mobile version

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

US Armada En Route to Persian Gulf:"Naval Blockade" or All Out War Against Iran?

Michel Chossudovsky | 13.08.2008 21:11 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Terror War | London | World

US sponsored war games have foreseen the possible intervention of Russia and China in the Middle East. World War III has been on the lips of NeoCon architects of US foreign policy from the outset of the Bush regime.

There is a tacit public acceptance of a diabolical and criminal military agenda, which in a very sense threatens "the community of nations" and life on this planet.


Brazil's Frigate Greenhalgh dispatched to participate in US War Games
Brazil's Frigate Greenhalgh dispatched to participate in US War Games

USS Abraham Lincoln
USS Abraham Lincoln

USS Peleliu
USS Peleliu

CENTCOM Commander General Petraeus favors an all out war on Iran
CENTCOM Commander General Petraeus favors an all out war on Iran

Canada's HMC Iroquois, involved in Maritime Security. Canada cur. leads CTF 150
Canada's HMC Iroquois, involved in Maritime Security. Canada cur. leads CTF 150

USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75)
USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75)

[Image 1: 9817.jpg]

The World it at a very dangerous crossroads. America in alliance with NATO and
Israel has embarked upon a military adventure.

The Bush administration has launched with the approval of the US Congress a
naval blockade against Iran, which could be a first step towards an all out

Military sources report a massive deployment of US and allied naval power in
the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea and the Red Sea directed against Iran.

There has been a virtual media blackout regarding this naval deployment. The
Western media, including the printed press and network TV have failed to
meaningfully address these war preparations.

While war plans directed against are casually acknowledged, the broader
implications of a war on Iran are rarely analyzed.

The US media has become a unconditional mouthpiece of the Pentagon. The
Islamic republic is relentlessly accused, without a evidence and
substantiation, of developing nuclear weapons, as well as working hand in
glove with Al Qaeda.

The emerging political consensus among America's allies, including France,
Germany and Italy is that a war on Iran is warranted as a means to enhancing
global security.

This consensus is formulated while carefully disregarding the fact that even a
limited "punitive" aerial attack on Iran, would immediately result in
escalation, engulfing the entire Middle East Central Asian region from the
Eastern Mediterranean to China's western frontier into an extended war zone.
There are at present three distinct war theater in the region: Afghanistan,
Iraq and Palestine. An attack on Iran could potentially engulf a large number
of countries into a much broader conflict.


[Image 2: menewzz.bmp]

A war on Iran would engulf the entire region from the tip of the Arabian
to the Caspian Sea and from the Syrian-Lebanese-Israeli Medterranean coastline
China's Western frontier with Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Three existing war theaters:


would be transformed and integrated into a single war zone,
leading to escalation within and beyond the region.


War Preparations

This massive naval deployment in the Persian Gulf is the culmination of more
than five years of active war preparations.

In July 2003, in the immediate wake of the Iraq invasion, the Pentagon
launched Theater Iran Near Term (TIRANNT) [1] , as an early phase in military
planning in which various war scenarios were scrutinized. In this context,
several thousand targets inside Iran had been identified as part of a set of
war scenarios:

"Under TIRANNT, Army and U.S. Central Command planners have been examining
both near-term and out-year scenarios for war with Iran, including all aspects
of a major combat operation, from mobilization and deployment of forces
through postwar stability operations after regime change." (William Arkin,
Washington Post, April 16, 2006)

The Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) has served as a pretext and a justification
to wage America's theater wars in the Middle East. GWOT is a central component
of US National Security doctrine. It is also the keystone of the media
disinformation campaign, which portrays "Islamic terrorists" threatening the
Homeland. Meanwhile, the strategic and economic objectives underlying
America's Middle East war.

The US led coalition is in an advanced state of readiness. The war plans are
at an operational stage.

While the stated objective of this massive naval deployment is to obstruct
trade through the straight of Hormuz and enforce a blockade on Iran in the
Persian Gulf, an all out war scenario involving air bombardments is also

Congressional Approval

The war on Iran is a bipartisan project, which has been fully endorsed by the
Democrats. The naval blockade is being carried out, pursuant to act of the US

In May 2008, the US Congress passed legislation (H.CON. RES 362) that called
for the enforcement of an all out economic blockade, including the
encroachment of trade and the freeze of monetary transactions with the Islamic

"The President [shall] initiate an international effort to immediately and
dramatically increase the economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on Iran
.... prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products;
imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships,
planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the
international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating
the suspension of Iran's nuclear program."

"[H. CON. RES. 362] urges the President, in the strongest of terms, to
immediately use his existing authority to impose sanctions on the Central Bank
of Iran, ... international banks which continue to conduct financial
transactions with proscribed Iranian banks; ... energy companies that have
invested $20,000,000 or more in the Iranian petroleum or natural gas sector in
any given year since the enactment of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996; and all
companies which continue to do business with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary
Guard Corps." (See full text of H.CON RES 362) [2] (emphasis added)

Whether an actual attack will be implemented is a matter for careful

What is significant, however, is that the ongoing concentration of naval power
as well as the level of threat are unprecedented.

Moreover, this naval deployment also involves the active participation of
several coalition countries under US command. (for details see below).

While there have been several similar naval deployments and war games in the
Persian Gulf over the last two years, what is now occurring is unprecedented
in terms of the size of the naval strike force.

Concurrent Military Operations: War in the Caucasus

This massive deployment of naval strength occurs at the very outset of an
unfolding crisis in the Caucasus, marked by the Georgian air and ground
attacks on South Ossetia and Russia's counterattack. The timing and chronology
of these related and concurrent military operations is crucial.

We are not dealing with separate and unrelated military events. The war in
Georgia is an integral part of US-NATO-Israeli war preparations in relation to

Georgia does not act militarily without the assent of Washington. The Georgian
head of State is a US proxy and Georgia is a de facto US protectorate.

The attack on South Ossetia was launched by Georgia on the orders of the US
and NATO. US military advisers and trainers were actively involved in the
planning of Georgia's attacks on the South Ossetia capital. (For further
details see Michel Chossudovsky, War in the Caucasus, Towards a Broader
Russia-US Military Confrontation, Global Research, August 10, 2008 [3] )

Russia is an ally of Iran.

Russia is currently caught up in a military confrontation with Georgia. The
Georgian attack on South Ossetia constitutes an act of provocation directed
against Russia. It creates an aura of instability in the Caucasus, marked by
heavy civilian casualties. It serves to distract Russia from playing a
meaningful diplomatic and military role, which might undermine or obstruct the
US-led war plans directed against Iran.

Both Russia and China have bilateral military cooperation agreements with
Iran. Russia supplies the Islamic Republic with military hardware and
technical expertise in relation to Iran's air defense system and missile

Since 2005, Iran has an observer member status in the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization (SCO). In turn, the SCO has ties to the Collective Security
Treaty Organization (CSTO), an overlapping military cooperation agreement
between Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic,

The structure and strength of military alliances is crucial. In the context of
US war plans directed against Iran, the US is intent upon weakening Iran's
allies, namely Russia and China. In the case of China, Washington is seeking
to disrupt Beijing's bilateral ties with Tehran as well as Iran's
rapprochement with the SCO, which has its headquarters in Beijing.

The Georgian attack on South Ossetia seeks to undermine Russia, which
constitutes a significant countervailing military power and ally of Iran.

The ultimate objective is to isolate Iran, cut it off from its powerful
allies: China and Russia.

In Washington's mindset, the events in Georgia coupled with media propaganda,
can be usefully applied to discredit and weaken Russia prior to the
enforcement of a naval blockade on Iran in the Persian Gulf, which could lead
into an all out war on Iran.

This somewhat crude line of reasoning tends, however, to overlook America's
own military setbacks and weaknesses as well as the enormous risks to America
and the World which could result from a continued and sustained confrontation
with Russia, let alone an attack on Iran.

In view of the evolving situation in Georgia and Moscow's military commitments
in the Caucasus, military analysts believe that Russia will not protect Iran
and encroach upon a US led operation directed against Iran, which would be
preceded by a naval blockade.

In other words, Washington believes that Moscow is unlikely to get actively
involved in a showdown with US and allied forces in the Persian Gulf.

"Operation Brimstone": North Atlantic Ocean War Games

Leading up to this naval build up in the Persian Gulf, US and allied forces
have recently completed large scale war games off the US North Atlantic

Stating the purpose of a war game and identifying the real "foreign enemy" by
name is not the normal practice, unless there is a decision to send an
unequivocal message to the enemy.

Invariably, in war games the foreign enemy is given a fictitious country name:
Irmingham, Nemazee, Rubeck and Churia stand for Iran, North Korea, Russia and
China (codes used in the Vigilant Shield 07 War Games' Scenario opposing the
US to four fictitious enemies. (See William Arkin, The Vigilant Shield 07 War
Games: Scenario opposing the US to Russia, China, Iran and North Korea,
Washington Post, February 10, 2007 [4])

In the case of Operation Brimstone, the stated military purpose of the naval
exercise is crystal clear: the North Atlantic war games are carried out with a
view "to practice enforcing an eventual blockade on Iran". These naval
exercises are intended to display US and allied "combat capabilities as a
warning to Iran." They are tantamount to a declaration of war.

"The drill is aimed at training for operation in shallow coastal waters such
as the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz."

Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFEX) 08-4 'Operation Brimstone' commenced on July
21 in North Carolina and off the Eastern US Atlantic coast from Virginia to
Florida. Of significance was the participation of British, French, Brazilian
and Italian naval forces as part of a multinational US naval exercise directed
against Iran.

More than a dozen ships participated in the naval exercise including the USS
Theodore Roosevelt and its Carrier Strike Group Two, the expeditionary Strike
Group Iwo Jima, the French submarine Amethyste, Britain's HMS Illustrious
Carrier Strike Group, Brazil's navy frigate Greenhalgh and Italy's ITS
Salvatore Todaro (S 526) submarine. (See Middle East Times, August 11, 2008
[5] and, July 28, 2008 [6] and

The USS Theodore Roosevelt equipped with 80-plus combat planes, was carrying
an additional load of French Naval Rafale fighter jets from the French carrier
Charles de Gaulle. (Ibid). France's E2C Hawkeye early warning aircraft was
"assigned to the 4th Squadron began flight operations with Carrier Air Wing
(CVW) 8 aboard Roosevelt, marking the first integrated U.S. and French carrier
qualifications aboard a U.S. aircraft carrier. French Rafale fighter aircraft
assigned to the 12th Squadron also joined.", July 24, 2008 [7]

Anglo-US war games are a routine practice, consequence of a Anglo-American
military axis. What is significant in these large scale naval manoeuvres is
the active participation of France, Brazil and Italy in war games which are
explicitly directed against Iran.

The participation of these countries in extensive war games points a to broad
military consensus. It also suggests that the participating nations have
accepted (in political and military terms) to participate in a US-led military
operation directed against Iran. The active participation of France and to a
lesser extent Italy also suggests that the European Union is firmly behind the
US initiative:

"Operations with our friends and allies are the cornerstone of the U.S. Navy's
current maritime strategy," said Capt. Ladd Wheeler, Roosevelt's commanding
officer. "These combined operations will certainly pay dividends into the
future as our navies continue to work together to increase global
security.", July 24, 2008 [7]

Another important precedent has been set. Brazil's President Luis Ignacio da
Silva has ordered the dispatch of the Greenhalgh marking the first time that a
Brazilian warship (under a government which claims to be "socialist") has
operated as part of a US. strike group against a foreign country. We have not
been able to confirm whether the Brazilian frigate has sailed to the Persian
Gulf together with USS Roosevelt, to which it was attached during Operation

According to the Greenhalgh's Commander Claudio Mello, "It allows us to be one
more asset in an international operation." (Pilot, July 28, 2008

[Image 3: Greenhalgh_Class_Greenhalgh_F46.jpg]

En Route to the Persian Gulf

Of significance is that immediately upon completing the North Atlantic war
games, on July 31st, the Operation Brimstone Joint Task Force headed for the
Persian Gulf, to join up with three other carrier strike groups and a
constellation of US, British and French war ships. In other words, Operation
Brimstone was a dress rehearsal of an actual naval blockade.

According to military sources, the following naval forces, which are already
deployed in the Persian Gulf consists of

-the nuclear powered USS Ronald Reagan Carrier and its Strike Group Seven;

-the USS Iwo Jima,

- the British Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal

-several French warships, including the nuclear hunter-killer submarine

Also positioned in the region are the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea
and the USS Peleliu [9] which is currently in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.

[Image 4: linconln.gif]

Unprecedented Deployment of Naval Power

This is the largest concentration of US and allied naval power since the
onslaught of the Iraq war in March 2003.

Once the Brimstone joint task force naval force arrives in the Gulf region, it
will be joining two other U.S. naval battle groups already on site: the USS
Abraham Lincoln [10] and the USS Peleliu.

[Image 5: peleliu.jpg]

Four US aircraft carriers and strike forces will be positioned in the Persian
Gulf, the Arabian Sea and the Red Sea.

USS Theodore Roosevelt, USS Ronald Reagan. USS Abraham Lincoln, USS Peleliu
Strike Group. The US is also sending to the Middle East the Iwo Jima
Expeditionary Strike Group

With accompanying frigates and submarines, some 40 war ships will be in a
state of readiness, in the region and/or or directly off the Iranian

In addition to these 40 war ships, there are some 36 US and allied war vessels
operating under USCentcom as part of a Combined Maritime Force (CMF) involved
in Maritime Security

In an August 11 article published by Global Research, the nature of this Naval
Strike force is specified and enumerated as follows:

"The US Naval forces being assembled include the following:

Carrier Strike Group Nine

USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN72) nuclear powered supercarrier with its Carrier Air
Wing Two Destroyer Squadron Nine: [11]

USS Mobile Bay (CG53) guided missile cruiser
USS Russell (DDG59) guided missile destroyer
USS Momsen (DDG92) guided missile destroyer
USS Shoup (DDG86) guided missile destroyer
USS Ford (FFG54) guided missile frigate
USS Ingraham (FFG61) guided missile frigate
USS Rodney M. Davis (FFG60) guided missile frigate
USS Curts (FFG38) guided missile frigate
Plus one or more nuclear hunter-killer submarines

Peleliu Expeditionary Strike Group

USS Peleliu (LHA-5) a Tarawa-class amphibious assault carrier
USS Pearl Harbor (LSD52) assault ship
USS Dubuque (LPD8) assault ship/landing dock
USS Cape St. George (CG71) guided missile cruiser
USS Halsey (DDG97) guided missile destroyer
USS Benfold (DDG65) guided missile destroyer

Carrier Strike Group Two

USS Theodore Roosevelt (DVN71) nuclear powered supercarrier with its Carrier
Air Wing Eight [Set sail for the Gulf on August 5]

Destroyer Squadron 22
USS Monterey (CG61) guided missile cruiser
USS Mason (DDG87) guided missile destroyer
USS Nitze (DDG94) guided missile destroyer
USS Sullivans (DDG68) guided missile destroyer

USS Springfield (SSN761) nuclear powered hunter-killer submarine

IWO ESG ~ Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group [Set sail for the Gulf]

USS Iwo Jima (LHD7) amphibious assault carrier with its Amphibious Squadron
Four and with its 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit
USS San Antonio (LPD17) assault ship
USS Velia Gulf (CG72) guided missile cruiser
USS Ramage (DDG61) guided missile destroyer
USS Carter Hall (LSD50) assault ship
USS Roosevelt (DDG80) guided missile destroyer

USS Hartford (SSN768) nuclear powered hunter-killer submarine

Carrier Strike Group Seven

USS Ronald Reagan (CVN76) nuclear powered supercarrier with its Carrier Air
Wing 14 Destroyer Squadron 7

USS Chancellorsville (CG62) guided missile cruiser
USS Howard (DDG83) guided missile destroyer
USS Gridley (DDG101) guided missile destroyer
USS Decatur (DDG73) guided missile destroyer
USS Thach (FFG43) guided missile frigate
USNS Rainier (T-AOE-7) fast combat support ship

Also likely to join the battle armada:

UK Royal Navy HMS Ark Royal Carrier Strike Group with assorted guided missile
destroyers and frigates, nuclear hunter-killer submarines and support ships

French Navy nuclear powered hunter-killer submarines (likely the Amethyste and
perhaps others), plus French Naval Rafale fighter jets operating off of the
USS Theodore Roosevelt as the French Carrier Charles de Gaulle is in dry dock,
and assorted surface warships

The USS Iwo Jima and USS Peleliu Expeditionary Strike Groups have USMC Harrier
jump jets and an assortment of assault and attack helicopters. The
Expeditionary Strike Groups have powerful USMC Expeditionary Units with
amphibious armor and ground forces trained for operating in shallow waters and
in seizures of land assets, such as Qeshm Island (a 50 mile long island off of
Bandar Abbas in the Gulf of Hormuz and headquarters off the Iranian Islamic
Revolutionary Guards Corps)."

(See Earl of Sterling, Massive US Naval Armada Heads For Iran, Global Research
[12], August 2008

"Maritime Security": Thirty-six More Vessels

US Central Command (CENTCOM) under the helm of General Petraeus, coordinates
out of Bahrain so-called Maritime Security Operations (MSO) [20] in Middle
East waters ( Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Oman, Arabian Sea, Red Sea and Indian

[Image 6: petreus.jpeg]

This MSO initiative is conducted by the Combined Maritime Force (CMF) with a
powerful armada of 36 warships.

Established at the outset of the Iraq war, CMF involves the participation of
the US, Canada, Australia, UK, Germany, Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, New
Zealand, Portugal, Spain, Turkey and Pakistan.

There are several combined task forces responsible for maritime security
(including CTF 150, CTF 152 and the CTF 158 North Arabian Gulf (NAG))

The mandate of the Combined Task Forces "aims to establish security and
stability by countering terrorism in the Middle Eastern maritime environment
and allowing legitimate mariners to operate safely in the area..." (see
Canadian Navy, News [13]), In the present context, the multinational
alliance, will be used to encroach upon maritime trade with Iran as well as
play an active role in the implementing the proposed economic blockade of

Canada has recently deployed three war ships to the Arabian sea, including HMC
Iroquois along with HMC Calgary and HMC Protecteur which will be operating
under CTF 150, which is responsible for MSO in the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of
Oman, the Arabian Sea, the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.

[Image 7: iroquois.jpg]

Among the 36 war vessels involved in so-called Maritime Security Operations,

RBNS Sabha (FFG 90) - The Bahraini flagship of CTF 152 conducting Maritime
Security Operations (MSO) in the Central and Southern Arabian Gulf.

USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) - The U.S. flagship of CTF 50, conducting MSO in
the Central and Southern Arabian Gulf, as well as supports Operations Enduring
Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.

FS Guepratte (F 714) - French Navy ship operating as part of CTF 150 in the
North Arabian Sea, Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Oman, Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.

USCGC Wrangell (WPB 1332) - One of several USCG 110' patrol boats conducting
MSO in the North Arabian Gulf.

HMAS Arunta (F 151) - Australian Navy ship conducting MSO as part of CTF 158 .

PNS Tippu Sultan (D 186) - Pakistan Navy ship conducting MSO as part of CTF

RFA Cardigan Bay (L 3009) - British Royal Navy auxiliary ship operating with
CTF 158.

USS Port Royal (CG 73) - US Navy guided-missile cruiser deployed with USS
Tarawa Expeditionary Strike Group.

Source: US Naval forces, Central Command, Fifth fleet, Combined Maritime
Forces [14]

[Image 8: truman2.jpg]

Naval Blockade

For Iran, a naval blockade enforced by some 80 war ships stationed in Middle
East waters and off the Iranian coastline is tantamount to a declaration of

Meanwhile, war preparations are also being undertaken by Israel and NATO in
the Eastern Mediterranean. German war ships are stationed off the Syrian
coastline. Turkey which constitutes a major military actor within NATO is a
major partner of the US led coalition. It has an extended bilateral military
cooperation agreement with Israel. Turkey has borders with both Iran and
Syria. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, "Triple Alliance": The
US, Turkey, Israel and the War on Lebanon, [15] Global Research, August 6,

Pre-emptive Nuclear War

A diabolical and related consensus is emerging at the political level,
pointing to the pre-emptive first strike use of nuclear weapons in the Middle
East war theater, more concretely against Iran:

"In January 2005, at the outset of the military build-up directed against
Iran, USSTRATCOM was identified as "the lead Combatant Command for integration
and synchronization of DoD-wide efforts in combating weapons of mass

To implement this mandate, a brand new command unit entitled Joint Functional
Component Command Space and Global Strike [16] , or JFCCSGS was created.

JFCCSGS has the mandate to oversee the launching of a nuclear attack in
accordance with the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review, approved by the US Congress
in 2002. The NPR underscores the pre-emptive use of nuclear warheads not only
against "rogue states" but also against China and Russia."Michel Chossudovsky
[17], Nuclear War against Iran, Global Research, January 2006)

More recently, a December 2007 NATO sponsored report entitled "Towards a Grand
Strategy for an Uncertain World: Renewing Transatlantic Partnership" [18]. calls
for a first strike preemptive use of nuclear weapons. The NATO doctrine in
this report is a virtual copy and paste version of America's post 9/11 nuclear
weapons doctrine as initially formulated in the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review

(for details, see Michel Chossudovsky, The US-NATO Preemptive Nuclear
Doctrine: Trigger a Middle East Nuclear Holocaust to Defend "The Western Way
of Life", Global Research, January 2008) [19]

The preemptive use of nukes as formulated by NATO would be used to undermine
an "increasingly brutal World" (e.g. Iran) as well as a means to prevent rogue
enemies to use weapons of mass destruction. [19]

Under this NATO framework, which is what is explicitly envisaged in relation
to Iran, US and allied forces including Israel would "resort to a pre-emptive
nuclear attack to try to halt the imminent spread of nuclear weapons, "
(quoted in Paul Dibb, Sidney Morning Herald, 11 February 2008). [19]

"They [the authors of the report] consider that nuclear war might soon become
possible in an increasingly brutal world. They propose the first use of
nuclear weapons must remain "in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate
instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction". (Paul Dibb, op
cit) [19]

In terms of the ongoing threats directed against Iran, a pre-emptive nuclear
attack using tactical nuclear weapons, which are according to the Pentagon is
"harmless to the surrounding civilian population" could be carried out in
relation to Iran, even if Iran does not possess nuclear weapons
capabilities, as confirmed by the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE).

According to a 2003 Senate decision, the new generation of tactical nuclear
weapons or "low yield" "mini-nukes", with an explosive capacity of up to 6
times a Hiroshima bomb, are now considered "safe for civilians" because the
explosion is underground. [19]

Through a propaganda campaign which has enlisted the support of
"authoritative" nuclear scientists, the mini-nukes are being presented as an
instrument of peace rather than war. The low-yield nukes have now been cleared
for "battlefield use", they are slated to be used in the next stage of the
Middle East war (Iran) alongside conventional weapons:

Administration officials argue that low-yield nuclear weapons are needed as a
credible deterrent against rogue states.[Iran, North Korea] Their logic is
that existing nuclear weapons are too destructive to be used except in a
full-scale nuclear war. Potential enemies realize this, thus they do not
consider the threat of nuclear retaliation to be credible. However, low-yield
nuclear weapons are less destructive, thus might conceivably be used. That
would make them more effective as a deterrent. ( Opponents Surprised By
Elimination of Nuke Research Funds Defense News November 29, 2004)

In an utterly twisted logic, nuclear weapons are presented as a means to
building peace and preventing "collateral damage".

The NATO sponsored report --which broadly reflects a growing consensus--
insists that the option of a nuclear first strike is indispensable, "since
there is simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world." (Report, p.

"Nuclear weapons are the ultimate instrument of an asymmetric response - and
at the same time the ultimate tool of escalation"

The US-NATO doctrine to use nukes on a pre-emptive basis against Iran, with a
view to "saving the Western World's way of life", is not challenged in any
meaningful way by the antiwar movement.

The mainstream media has a strong grip on the public's perception and
understanding of the Middle East war. The dangers of nuclear war in the Post
cold War era are barely mentioned and when they are, the use of nuclear
weapons are justified as a preemptive military option to ensure the security
of Western World.

The truth is twisted and turned upside down.

Media disinformation instills within the consciousness of Americans and
Europeans that somehow the war on Iran is a necessity, that Iran is a threat
to the Homeland and that the Islamic Republic is supporting Islamic
terrorists, who are planning a Second 9/11. And that a pre-emptive nuclear
attack is the answer.

In contrast, the powerful economic interests behind the war economy, the
Anglo-American oil giants military, the defense contractors, Wall Street are
rarely the object of media coverage. The real economic and strategic
objectives behind this war are carefully obfuscated.

9/11 is a justification for waging war is crucial, despite the fact that there
is mounting evidence of cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush

Despite the evidence, Afghanistan, Iraq and now Iran have been portrayed as
the "State sponsors of terrorism" and a threat to the Homeland, thereby
justifying the various stages of the Middle East military roadmap. The Project
for a New American Century, had already described in a 2000 document the
nature of this road map or "long war". What is envisaged is a global war
without borders:

fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars (PNAC,
September 2000)

At present US and coalition forces including NATO and Israel are in an
advanced state of readiness to launch an attack on Iran. Leaders of the US led
coalition including France, Germany and Italy, should understand that such an
action could result in a World War III scenario.

Escalation scenarios have already been envisaged and analyzed by the Pentagon.

US sponsored war games have foreseen the possible intervention of Russia and
China in the Middle East. World War III has been on the lips of NeoCon
architects of US foreign policy from the outset of the Bush regime.

In response to Operation Brimstone and the Naval deployment, Iran's Foreign
Ministry said that "Tehran will give a 'maximum response' to the slightest
threat against the country's national security."

War propaganda, through media disinformation consists in galvanizing US
citizens not only in favor of "the war on terrorism", but in support of a
social order which repeals the Rule of Law, derogates fundamental civil
liberties, upholds the use of torture and establishes a modern police state
apparatus as a means to "preserving Western democracy".

There is a tacit public acceptance of a diabolical and criminal military
agenda, which in a very sense threatens "the community of nations" and life on
this planet.


In the course of the last four years, Global Research has documented in detail
the various war plans directed against Iran. Operation TIRANNT (Theater Iran
Near Term) was initially formulated in July 2003, in the wake of the US led
Iraq invasion.

We have done our utmost to reverse the tide of media disinformation, to inform
our readers and the broader public on the impending dangers underlying the US
military adventure.

This is the most serious crisis in modern history which in a very real sense
threatens the future of humanity.

We refer our readers to an extensive archive of articles and documents. See
our War on Iran Dossier [20]


Michel Chossudovsky is the author of the international bestseller America's
"War on Terrorism" Global Research, 2005. [21]


Michel Chossudovsky
- Homepage: http://


Hide the following 2 comments

"From Tbilisi to Teheran" Heightens Suspicions of Motive in Georgian Crisis

14.08.2008 01:48

"From Tbilisi to Teheran" Heightens Suspicions of Motive in Georgian Crisis

Since the attacks by Georgia which sparked the fighting (which, alone, suggests Georgia had been promised the support of a larger power) took place on the day that the last two US carrier groups started for the Strait of Hormuz, it would appear that one motive (besides the pipelines from the Caspian which rival the new ones the US built in Afghanistan) appears to be tying up and/or demonizing Russia, in order to minimize its response to US/Israeli Aggression towards Iran.

The following article from the Jerusalem Post appears to support this, as does the US/Israeli line seen today, as well as the willingness of the bulk of the Western press to so horribly misrepresent this conflict.

From Tbilisi to Teheran

As the Russian bear plunges its claws into the heart of its much smaller neighbor Georgia, few outside the region seem to appreciate the danger posed by Moscow's latest aggression.

(This author ignores the fact that Russian actions were a response to the aggression of US and Israel-backed forces, against the civilians in the south, and Russian military personnel. This was so conspicuously a deliberate provocation, intended to spark a war.)

While many might have difficulty finding Georgia on the map, that in no way detracts from the significance of the situation. Israel and the West would be making a grave error if they merely shrug and issue a few perfunctory press releases in response to this perilous development.

(Indeed. The West needs to regain control over its governments, as this and so many other recent crises demonstrate.)

How this crisis plays out will have a direct impact on the ability of Israel and the US to confront an even greater menace that lies just around the corner - Iran and its stubborn drive to build nuclear weapons.

(There is no "stubborn drive to build nuclear weapons", and that's the opinion of both the UN's IAEA and the world intelligence community. The only "stubborn drive" here is on the part of Israeli and American Extremists, who are plotting to once again ignore International Law, and attack another country without justification. But this statement DOES support the belief that this war was intentionally started in order to limit Russia's response to an act of aggression towards Iran ...)

Here's why: Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is testing the West's mettle. He senses weakness, and is using the conflict with Georgia, a close ally of Washington, to see to what extent the US and Europe will stand up for their friends and their own interests.

(He is most certainly exploiting their weakness, but the US deliberately started this, and handed the moral high ground to the Russians in doing so.)

In recent years, Russia has become increasingly assertive on the international stage, frequently seeking to undermine Western policy.

(That's because "Western" - read: "American" - policy towards Russia has become increasingly hostile, belligerent, and provocative.)

From North Korea's nuclear program to Kosovo's drive for independence from Serbia, Moscow has taken stances directly opposed to those of the US.

But the invasion of Georgia constitutes a serious escalation, as Russia is no longer confining its mischief to the realm of diplomacy.

(Again ... Russia responded to US/Israel-supported AGGRESSION.)

THE SMALL Caucasus nation has been an outspoken friend of Washington, steadfastly supporting the war on terror and maintaining a sizable troop presence in Iraq. Just four months ago, at a summit in Bucharest, NATO agreed to invite Georgia to join the alliance. By raping Georgia in public, Putin is thumbing his nose at the entire Western alliance.

(No he's not. The CIA has been inciting seperatist movements in the region as part of its program designed to encircle Russia, in order to undermine its power.)

So far, the success of his little experiment has been clear. Putin pounces on his neighbor with abandon, violating Georgia's sovereignty and territorial integrity and indiscriminately bombing innocent civilians with little more than ineffectual expressions of outrage from Paris, London and Washington.

(This is not what happened at all, and no Israeli or American Propagandist has any place tossing such allegations about, considering the brutal and abhorrent, criminal behaviour of both Regimes in those increasingly-Extremist nations.)

Ostensibly, the Kremlin claims it is merely acting to protect the large Russian population that lives in the breakaway Georgian regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. But it is easy to see through the smoke screen of Russian propaganda.

(Actually, the Georgians were targeting civilians, so the facts support the Russian line, while they also make it easy to see through the all-too-visible smokescreen being laid out by the belligerent parties.)

For one thing, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili agreed over the weekend to a cease-fire and began withdrawing his country's troops from South Ossetia.

That didn't stop Putin from pressing forward with disproportionate attacks, as Russia sent armored columns deeper into Georgian territory.

(Why should it? And again, no Israeli has any authority to speak of "disproportionate attacks", especially since the numbers demonstrate Russian restraint.)

Moreover, it is hard to take Russia's claims seriously, if only because of their transparent hypocrisy. When the province of Chechnya sought to break away from Russia, Moscow refused to countenance the idea and instead bombed the region into submission.

(And then the Westy stepped in, and further bombed the region into submission ...)

But when South Ossetia and Abkhazia seek to secede from Georgia, Russia chooses to defend their right to do so, despite the glaring contradiction in Moscow's stance.

(There is no contradiction. In both cases, the groups Russia opposed were created and supported by the CIA, as part of American's continuing hostility towards Russia.)

Russia is motivated by one principle alone: the pursuit of its own interests - even if that means storming an internationally recognized border and threatening to bring down the democratically elected government in Tbilisi.

(That government has proven itself to be brutal and corrupt, symbolically elected or not. Russia crossed the border in response to aggression, which is a legitimate action. Again, against the backdrop of the International Crimes of the US, Israel, and other states over the past few years, it's laughable for them to toss these accusations about - especially since they're not true.)

This can not be allowed to stand. Russia's move into Georgia will have ramifications far beyond the Caucasus. It will send a shiver down the spines of decision-makers in countries such as Poland, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, all of whom might now think twice before deepening their romances with the West.

(That's great. Since the "West" intended to use those states as another portion of its encirclement of and hostility towards Russia, this will stop them in their tracks, perhaps avoiding future conflict in the process.)

And if allowed to go unanswered, the attack on Georgia will strengthen Russia's resolve to further undercut key Western interests.

(Oh, it will not. And the "Western" interests at play here aren't anything to mourn the loss of.)

THAT IS where Iran comes into play. The ayatollahs are glued to their television screens, waiting to see how the West responds.

(To hear the American and Israeli Extremists and Neo-Fascists tell it, Arab leaders spend all their time watching TV ...)

After all, in recent years Moscow has stood by Iran's side in the face of mounting Western pressure.

(Or American/Israeli belligerence, conspiracy, and hostility ...)

Russia has been supplying Iran with materials for its nuclear program.

(So what? There is nothing wrong with this, as the program is concerned only with the development of nuclear energy. Meanwhile, both countries plotting to attack it maintain covert programs of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, and have both been caught illegally aiding the weapons programs of other states.)

And the Kremlin is planning to ship advanced anti-aircraft systems to the Iranians that are aimed at making it harder for Israel or the US to take out their nuclear installations.

(The Israeli/American plot to attack Iran has nothing to do with its nuclear program. That's simply their excuse, like Iraqi WMD and 911 & Afghanistan. Since Israel and the US are plotting to illegally attack the country, Russia again finds itself with the moral uppoer hand. If I knew of a planned attack to come, I'd be investing in these systems too.)

While Moscow has thus far voted in favor of three UN Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions on Teheran, it has only done so after it succeeded in watering them down and delaying their implementation.

(That's because the entire process is the usual game of creating the illusion of a crisis, in the name of leveraging a feigned justification for a war which has been long-premeditated. Investigations are currently underway into allegations that the US coerced countries into voting with it at the UN.)

But a newly emboldened Russia will prove to be even more troublesome when it comes time to confront Iran and stop its drive toward nuclear weapons.

(Again, the author hints that the motivation for this aggression was about limiting a Russian response to aggression against Iran. The fact that this is happening, as forces mass in the Gulf, suggests that the US and Israel are gearing up for their illegal war.

There is no need to "confront Iran", and there is no Iranian drive towards nuclear weapons ... The ONLY people claiming otherwise - entirely without evidence - are the same criminal Extremists who LIED about Iraq in order to start that illegal war.)

If Putin sees that the West is a paper tiger and allows Georgia to be trampled, then he likely will not hesitate to block additional Western efforts to strip Iran of its nuclear ambitions.

(Read: Attack Iran, as has been planned for years now.)

An atomic Iran, Putin realizes, would further expose the powerlessness of the West, as well as heighten its sense of vulnerability. Consequently, he may be tempted to defy the West yet again, on an issue even closer to its heart, in an effort to push the envelope.

The ayatollahs know this all too well, and will be encouraged to continue their mad drive for atomic power, confident in the knowledge that they have little to fear.

(The drive for nuclear power - as all this is - as in "energy" is not "mad", it is a response to the growing demand for energy, in the face of decreasing oil supplies and insufficient petroleum-refining facilities.)

It is therefore essential that strong and immediate measures be taken to punish Russia for its Georgian adventure and strip it of any illusions it may have about a lack of Western resolve. These might include moving quickly to bring Georgia formally into NATO, suspending Russia's membership in the "Group of 8" leading industrialized nations and freezing talks recently launched with the European Union on a new EU-Russia agreement.

(Again, tying up and containing Russia, so that it will be unable to response adequately to a US/Israeli attack on Iran, which this intentionally-created crisis, coupled with recent military preparations and troops movements suggest can only be around the corner.)

Whatever course is decided upon, Moscow must be made to pay a heavy economic, political and diplomatic price for its actions, lest it persist in causing still greater harm.

(The truly assanine thing about this Propaganda is that these Extremists are saying Russia must be "punished" for aggression it isn't guilty of, so that they can limit Russia's ability to respond to real, devastating Aggression these whack-jobs are plotting against Iran, and have already carried out against several states!!)

As the crow flies, the road from Tbilisi to Teheran is more than 1,100 kilometers long. But if the West now fails to act, it may soon find that the distance between the two is far less than it imagined.

(More evidence that this deliberately-created conflict was an attempt to limit Russian's response to long-planned US and Israeli aggression towards Iran. Now that this has occured, how long before we see these nations again attack a sovereign state without justification? Will the world respond this time, or will it continue to Appease this Axis of Evil ... ?)

Bush rebuking Russia? Putin must be splitting his sides
Moscow has to take some of the blame. But it is the west's policy of liberal interventionism that has fuelled war in Georgia

The Israeli & US Roles in Georgian Conflict

Limiting Russia's Response to Attack on Iran

you have excelled the schoolyard with your trumpcards.

14.08.2008 15:51

this surely means war. it's very exciting isn't it? we must all go down the army & navy stores, stock up on protective wear and then enjoy a nice cup of tea whilst we await the public safety advice at the local cinema or a great big blue flash.

I feel obliged to add something to all this paranoia :-

where you will enjoy the 1984 BBC television play "Threads" which depicts how Sheffield gets nuked & smitten for getting up the Ruskie nose about Iran.

it's 108 minutes of pure exhilaration.
or if you're not up for enjoying armageddon in what was still the early days of BBC drama and colour telly - you can just read about the documentary here

harry potter

Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London: 2015 London Anarchist Bookfair
2nd - 8th November: Wrexham, Wales, UK & Everywhere: Week of Action Against the North Wales Prison & the Prison Industrial Complex. Cymraeg: Wythnos o Weithredu yn Erbyn Carchar Gogledd Cymru

Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-8pm, Yorkshire: Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO Menwith Hill US Spy Base More info: CAAB.

Every Tuesday, UK & worldwide: Counter Terror Tuesdays. Call the US Embassy nearest to you to protest Obama's Terror Tuesdays. More info here

Every day, London: Vigil for Julian Assange outside Ecuadorian Embassy

Parliament Sq Protest: see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel Indymedia | Palestine Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas Indymedia
All Regions
South Coast
Other Local IMCs
Bristol/South West
Social Media
You can follow @ukindymedia on and Twitter. We are working on a Twitter policy. We do not use Facebook, and advise you not to either.
Support Us
We need help paying the bills for hosting this site, please consider supporting us financially.
Other Media Projects
Dissident Island Radio
Corporate Watch
Media Lens
Earth First! Action Update
Earth First! Action Reports
All Topics
Animal Liberation
Climate Chaos
Energy Crisis
Free Spaces
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Public sector cuts
Social Struggles
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Major Reports
NATO 2014
G8 2013
2011 Census Resistance
Occupy Everywhere
August Riots
Dale Farm
J30 Strike
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010
Tar Sands
G20 London Summit
University Occupations for Gaza
Indymedia Server Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit 2009
Carmel Agrexco
G8 Japan 2008
Stop Sequani
Stop RWB
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising
Rossport Solidarity
Smash EDO
Past Major Reports
Encrypted Page
You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.
If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

Global IMC Network

satellite tv


estrecho / madiaq
la plana
northern england
nottingham imc
united kingdom

Latin America
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
puerto rico


South Asia

United States
hudson mohawk
kansas city
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
tampa bay
united states
western mass

West Asia


fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs