WILL THE POT BOIL OVER!
ARE ARTICLES 1 AND 2 CONNECTED IN SOME WAY?
ANSWER – YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE!
September 3, 2007
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
With Iran shelling across its northwestern border into Iraq against the Kurds, slipping weapons and trained terrorists across the length of its border into Iraq, rushing full steam ahead into development of nuclear weapons, the Pentagon developing a three-day blitz plan for Iran, a new max of 162,000 troops now in Iraq, and a statement by President Bush last week in which he warned that the U.S. and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late,” I cannot help but find myself wondering if these two articles which follow are not directly connected as one of his reasons for the trip.
Begin Article 1 – Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs – Daily Alert
September 3, 2007
Pentagon Three-Day Blitz Plan for Iran
Sarah Baxter
(Sunday Times-UK)
The Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days.
Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that U.S. military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
“They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military,” he said.
President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week, accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust.” He warned that the U.S. and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late.”
Begin Article 2, Associated Press, THE JERUSALEM PRESS
US President Bush makes a surprise visit to Iraq
Associated Press, THE JERUSALEM POST
September 3, 2007
US President George W. Bush made a surprise visit to Iraq on Monday, using the war zone as a backdrop to argue his case that the buildup of US troops is helping to stabilize the nation.
The president secretly flew 11 hours to Iraq as a showdown nears with Congress over whether his decision in January to order 30,000 more US troops to Iraq is working. He landed at an air base in Anbar province west of Baghdad.
Next week, Gen.
David Petraeus, the top US commander in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador in Baghdad, testify before Congress.
Their assessment of the conflict, along with a progress report the White House must give lawmakers by Sept.
15, will determine the next chapter of the war.
The United States cannot sustain the troop buildup indefinitely. And with Democrats calling for withdrawals and a rising US death toll that has topped 3,700, the president is pressed to give Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s much more time to find a political solution
to the fighting.
Bush stopped in Iraq ahead of his visit to Australia for an economic summit with Asia-Pacific leaders.
The trip was a closely held secret for obvious security reasons, although speculation about the trip arose late last month when first lady Laura Bush said she was staying home to tend to a pinched nerve in her neck.
The president, who also went to Iraq on Thanksgiving 2003 and in June 2006, was scheduled to leave for Australia on Monday, but Air Force One took off from Andrews Air Force Base Sunday evening instead.
He was joined by his top advisers, including National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates was traveling there separately. The mission to shore up support for the war was shared w ith only a small circle of Wh
ite House staffers and members of the media, who were told that if news of his trip leaked early, it would be scrapped.
The White House arranged Bush’s trip at a pivotal juncture in the Iraq debate. Some prominent Republican lawmakers have broken with Bush on his war strategy, but so far, most Republicans have stood with him. In exchange for their loyalty, they want to see substantial progress in Iraq soon.
Making his case before the Sept. 15 report de adline, Bush recently delivered
a series of speeches to highlight how the temporary military buildup has routed out insurgents and foreign fighters.
Bush has described what he calls “bottom-up” progress in Iraq and often cites a drop in violence in Anbar Province, once a hotbed of insurgency. The turnaround occurred when Sunni Arab leaders joined forces with US troops to hunt down members of al-Qaida, although it’s unclear whether they’ll back a unified Iraqi government as well.
Critics of the war argue that while the troop buildup may have tamped down violence, the Iraqis are making almost no headway toward political reconciliation.
They cite a handful of gloomy progress reports trickling out of Washington that show some success in curbing violence, but little progress toward political power-sharing agreements.
There are now 162,000 US troops in Iraq, including 30,000 that arrived since February as part of Bush’s revised str ategy to provide security so Ir
aqi leaders could build a unity government.
Bush met on Frid ay with his top milit
ary chiefs at the Pentagon who expressed concern about a growing strain on American troops and their families from long and often multiple combat tours.
Still, early indications are that the president intends to stick with his current approach – at least into 2008 – despite pressure from the Democratic-led Congress and some prominent Republicans.
Right now, the White House is working to keep Republican members of Congress in the president’s fold to prevent Democrats from amassing the strength to slash war funds or mandate immediate troop withdrawals.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.