White House Sought Options to Strike Iran

[joko104]

We aren't talking about any military plans. We are talking about a White House request for military options months after it happened. And it's an important thing for the public to know as thinking about attacking a country like Iran should never be done in a casual manner. Especially when all that happened was someone making a few holes in a empty parking lot. It would be also be interesting to know if they were planning to notify Congress of it's intentions. I certainly hope they would. Because supposedly only Congress has the power to declare war.

So your point is that any potential war plans should be fully discussed in advance with potential enemies so they can give their imput to Congress? Sure, I suppose in some abstract theory Germany would have surrendered if the Normandy invasion was discussed publicly and with Hitler and the German military in advance. At any moment a gamma ray burst from space could eliminate all life on earth too in theory.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Why would the info that they had asked the Pentagon for those options be a national security secret?

Because letting the Iranians know that the US government thinks that every single Iranian is as dumb as a rock and hasn't got a clue about military matters AND WANTS TO KEEP THAT OPINION SECRET might reveal how penetrating the US analysis of Iran is.

 

[joko104]

No, you're the one who is claiming it was classified. Come on! Show us! What secrets were revealed there. General? Put up or shut up.

Discussions in the White House and State Department concerning military potential plans are inherently classified info. That it does not take a written document stamped "classified" to constitute classified info has only been explained by the FBI on TV dozens of times.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Those are "mitary plans".

For some reason you appear to be under the impression that the Iranian government would never even think that there was the slightest hint that the US government might conceivably have even theoretically given a moment's passing thought to developing a contingency plan that might even look like something that resembles a plan to invade Iran.

Guess again.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Deflection from the point at hand. (And a false narrative at that...)

The issue here is the response once the attack began. At Benghazi, the Obama administration utterly failed our diplomats, leaving them on their own for 13 hours. So yes, it makes sense for this administration (and those following) to explore all options and have contingency plans in place when an embassy faces attack.

I'll get back to you when your post gives some evidence that you actually read the linked articles and you present a reasoned response to them.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

seize the north seas gas fields they own stakes in. Tell them to withdraw their troops in 72 hours or you will take those gas fields away for ever with no financial compensation.

The people that actually own those North Seas gas fields will get upset about the United States of America committing an act of war against them - AND those people DO have nuclear weapons (as well as delivery systems).

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

No, you're the one who is claiming it was classified. Come on! Show us! What secrets were revealed there. General? Put up or shut up.

Is that last statement the equivalent of asking your four year old to carry your pickup truck upstairs and put it to bed in the guest bedroom?

 

[uptower]

Foreign countries don't need spies in the USA. They have the anti-Trumpers in government and the American press to spy on the USA for them. The Iranian government can now quote the WSJ to promote anti-American propaganda and to justify further military build up.

And they have Trump's own staff and cabinet to leak like a sieve as well. Not to mention a president who'll happily smoke their poles and shaft the country for a sweet hotel deal. No need for spies at all when the Commander in Chief is an asset.

 

[Tom Horn]

The people that actually own those North Seas gas fields will get upset about the United States of America committing an act of war against them - AND those people DO have nuclear weapons (as well as delivery systems).

Yes. I know this. Serica Energy is the stock. Take the Iranians share away from them. Give it to who they’ve crapped on the most.

 

[apdst]

For some reason you appear to be under the impression that the Iranian government would never even think that there was the slightest hint that the US government might conceivably have even theoretically given a moment's passing thought to developing a contingency plan that might even look like something that resembles a plan to invade Iran.

Guess again.

Irrelevant.

 

[Atomic Kid]

So your point is that any potential war plans should be fully discussed in advance with potential enemies so they can give their imput to Congress? Sure, I suppose in some abstract theory Germany would have surrendered if the Normandy invasion was discussed publicly and with Hitler and the German military in advance. At any moment a gamma ray burst from space could eliminate all life on earth too in theory.

That's just too stupid of a statement to be worthy of wasting mine or anyone else's the time it would take to respond to it. You're not worthy!

 

[Bullseye]

[h=1]White House Sought Options to Strike Iran[/h][FONT="][SIZE=3]WASHINGTON—On a warm night in early September, militants fired three mortars into Baghdad’s sprawling diplomatic quarter, home to the U.S. Embassy.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="][SIZE=3]The shells—launched by a group aligned with Iran—landed in an open lot, harming no one. But they triggered unusual alarm in Washington, where President Trump’s national security team conducted a series of meetings to discuss a forceful American response.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]As part of the talks, Mr. Trump’s National Security Council, led by John Bolton, asked the Pentagon to provide the White House with military options to strike Iran. The request, which hasn’t been previously reported, generated concern at the Pentagon and State Department, current and former U.S. officials say.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/white-house-sought-options-to-strike-iran/ar-BBSaBnj?OCID=ansmsnnews11

Whoever released this information should absolutely be prosecuted for releasing military national security secrets. There is no justification whatsoever for anyone in the State Department or ANY other capacity divulging national security secrets. There are NO greater national security secrets than our military contingency plans. In the most real sense, anyone who released this information to the press was acting 100% as a spy for Iran. [/FONT]

This is pretty much standard operating procedure; requesting a military option doesn't mean it will ever be used - it's just another data point on the spectrum of choices given to the President.

 

[dcsports]

I'll get back to you when your post gives some evidence that you actually read the linked articles and you present a reasoned response to them.

It's fine if you don't want to have a discussion. I'm sorry if you aren't familiar with the incidents that happened in Benghazi, but I'm not going to post a recap to bring you up to speed. It was well publicized.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Your evidence would have been a bit more compelling were it not for the "Last updated October 13, 2011" bit.

It was the most recent UNSC Terror list I could find. Either way, is there reason to believe they still are no longer the #1 exporter of terrorism? Not being sarcastic, serious question.

 

[Moon]

For some reason you appear to be under the impression that the Iranian government would never even think that there was the slightest hint that the US government might conceivably have even theoretically given a moment's passing thought to developing a contingency plan that might even look like something that resembles a plan to invade Iran.

Guess again.

Of course they would. It becomes a diplomatic/political issue when that information is acknowledged publicly. Their response would be no different than ours if it was disclosed that Iran was reviewing military options for attacking US interests.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Irrelevant.

If "The Other Guy" already knows what you are going to be doing, exactly what "secret" are you revealing by letting "The Other Guy" know you are doing it?

If the Iranian government did NOT think that the US government was going to be preparing contingency plans for an invasion of Iran, then every single member of the Iranian military and/or foreign affairs departments would be even LESS of a "Great Military Leader" than Mr. Trump is.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

It was the most recent UNSC Terror list I could find. Either way, is there reason to believe they still are no longer the #1 exporter of terrorism? Not being sarcastic, serious question.

Considering that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan "get a pass" because they are "America's friends" there is some reason to be skeptical of the 2011 listing.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Of course they would. It becomes a diplomatic/political issue when that information is acknowledged publicly. Their response would be no different than ours if it was disclosed that Iran was reviewing military options for attacking US interests.

The odds on Iran actually reviewing military options for "attacking US interests" are just about as high as are the odds on Canada actually reviewing military options for "attacking US interests". You don't take a butter knife to a hand grenade fight.

 

[Bullseye]

The odds on Iran actually reviewing military options for "attacking US interests" are just about as high as are the odds on Canada actually reviewing military options for "attacking US interests". You don't take a butter knife to a hand grenade fight.

And you know that how? You sit in on IRC strategy meetings?

 

[Moon]

The odds on Iran actually reviewing military options for "attacking US interests" are just about as high as are the odds on Canada actually reviewing military options for "attacking US interests". You don't take a butter knife to a hand grenade fight.

Whether Iran would do it or not really isn’t the point.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Considering that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan "get a pass" because they are "America's friends" there is some reason to be skeptical of the 2011 listing.

Of course the "enemy of my enemy is my friend", as they say. Although Saudi's politics aligns itself with the US, Pakistan on the other hand should be right up there with Iran, as they were complicit in keeping OBL hidden for so long. I will give credit to Obama for allowing the USN to kill him.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

And you know that how? You sit in on IRC strategy meetings?

Please feel free to take a butter knife to a hand grenade fight.

PS - I joined the military in 1961, was commissioned in 1963, and left the military in 1999. I am probably one hell of a lot more familiar with military planning at the Brigade (and higher) level than you are. I am also, probably, one hell of a lot more familiar with actual governmental/military security than you are.

Did you know that one thing that military planners often do is ask the question "If I were __[fill in the blank]__ and I wanted to do the one thing that we really don't want __[fill in the blank]__ to do, what would that be?"?

PS - Did you know that there is an actual difference between "attacking __[fill in the blank]__" and "attacking the interests of __[fill in the blank]__"? The US government IS NOT preparing (contingency) plans for a military attack on Iran's INTERESTS (essentially because Iran has none outside of Iran) but rather IS preparing (contingency) plans to attack, invade, and conquer Iran. Were the Russians to be planning to do that to Poland the US government would be screaming its head off about "aggressive war" and "crimes against humanity".

PPS - What I did, where I did it, when I did it, and who I did it for, is absolutely none of your business, so don't bother to ask (because I won't tell you). Please feel completely free to form your own opinion that I haven't got even as much of a clue about military matters as Donald Trump if you feel like it, it won't bother me in the least.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Whether Iran would do it or not really isn’t the point.

That's right. Just like whether or not Iraq actually had "vast stockpiles of WND" wasn't the point.

What the point then was that the President of the United States of America ordered the US military to invade and conquer an independent and sovereign country.

The point now is whether the President of the United States of America is going to order the US military to invade and conquer an independent and sovereign country.

The point in the future is going to be whether the President of the United States of America continues to invade and conquer independent and sovereign countries just because they feel like doing so (and whether they are going to coordinate those invasions with the electoral cycle so as to ensure that they get re-elected).

 

[Evilroddy]

[h=1]White House Sought Options to Strike Iran[/h][FONT="][SIZE=3]WASHINGTON—On a warm night in early September, militants fired three mortars into Baghdad’s sprawling diplomatic quarter, home to the U.S. Embassy.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="][/FONT]
[FONT="][SIZE=3]The shells—launched by a group aligned with Iran—landed in an open lot, harming no one. But they triggered unusual alarm in Washington, where President Trump’s national security team conducted a series of meetings to discuss a forceful American response.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]As part of the talks, Mr. Trump’s National Security Council, led by John Bolton, asked the Pentagon to provide the White House with military options to strike Iran. The request, which hasn’t been previously reported, generated concern at the Pentagon and State Department, current and former U.S. officials say.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/white-house-sought-options-to-strike-iran/ar-BBSaBnj?OCID=ansmsnnews11

Whoever released this information should absolutely be prosecuted for releasing military national security secrets. There is no justification whatsoever for anyone in the State Department or ANY other capacity divulging national security secrets. There are NO greater national security secrets than our military contingency plans. In the most real sense, anyone who released this information to the press was acting 100% as a spy for Iran. [/FONT]

Joko104:

The NSC does not have the power to declare war and plunge the USA into a third Middle Eastern War which it cannot win. The blowing up of an empty lot in Iraq (not the USA) by Iraqi militias allegedly "aligned with Iran" (not Iranians) is not a valid casus belli for the US Government (not the sovereign power in Iraq) to attack Iran. Mr. Bolton and his neo-con militarist crew are out of control (as usual). This is true on a wider scale as most of American foreign policy is wonky too (this predates President Trump incidentally but the US foreign policy has become more contradictory since his assumption of the Office of the President of the USA.). The leaks were valuable from a public service point of view as they exposed yet another example of the US Administration unilaterally preparing to embark upon another vain-glorious military adventure without congressional approval, which would further disrupt the greater region, kill or maim American service personnel and civilians and trigger a wave of terrorist reprisals.

So no crime or security breach was committed here except for the crimes of a powerful cabal of militarists who would wage wars of aggression without congressional approval. The leakers were answering the old and honoured tradition of hue and cry by pointing out the crimes of Mr. Bolton and his ilk in the upper echelons of the US Government. Bravo to the whistleblowers, the US free press and individual(s) who had the guts to do this; they are defending America from the most dangerous domestic enemies it has known since the American Civil War.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Bullseye]

Please feel free to take a butter knife to a hand grenade fight.

PS - I joined the military in 1961, was commissioned in 1963, and left the military in 1999. I am probably one hell of a lot more familiar with military planning at the Brigade (and higher) level than you are. I am also, probably, one hell of a lot more familiar with actual governmental/military security than you are.

Probably not. I enlisted in 1971, was commissioned in 1973 and retired in 1993. I was Future Plans Officer on a Cruiser Destroyer Group staff, Operations Officer on a Destroyer and Chief Staff Officer on Electronic Warfare and Special Operations groups.

I do the one thing that we really don't want __[fill in the blank]__ to do, what would that be?"?

PS - Did you know that there is an actual difference between "attacking __[fill in the blank]__" and "attacking the interests of __[fill in the blank]__"? The US government IS NOT preparing (contingency) plans for a military attack on Iran's INTERESTS (essentially because Iran has none outside of Iran) but rather IS preparing (contingency) plans to attack, invade, and conquer Iran. Were the Russians to be planning to do that to Poland the US government would be screaming its head off about "aggressive war" and "crimes against humanity".

PPS - What I did, where I did it, when I did it, and who I did it for, is absolutely none of your business, so don't bother to ask (because I won't tell you). Please feel completely free to form your own opinion that I haven't got even as much of a clue about military matters as Donald Trump if you feel like it, it won't bother me in the least.

Yaaaaawwwwwnnnn. So you got nothing but pissing contest blather to add?