Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran.

[Anastasis 23469]

An old McCain piece gets reissued as a remaster.

https://apnews.com/c13d7c2ce4a1429bad83d5482f9193f3

Quote

US sending aircraft carrier to Mideast, citing Iran threats

By LOLITA BALDOR and ZEKE MILLER39 minutes ago

 

 

1 of 4

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo talks to the media on the sidelines of the Arctic Council ministers' working dinner at the Arktikum museum in Rovaniemi, Finland, Monday, May 6, 2019. The U.S. is dispatching an aircraft carrier and other military resources to the Middle East following what it says are indications that Iran and its proxy forces are preparing to possibly attack U.S. forces in the region. (Mandel Ngan/Pool Photo via AP)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. is sending an aircraft carrier group to the Middle East ahead of schedule and warning that Iran and its proxy forces are showing “troubling and escalatory” indications of a possible attack on American forces in the region.

Exactly what prompted the action was unclear, but it marked a further step in sharply rising tensions between the Trump administration and the Islamic Republic.

National Security Adviser John Bolton said Sunday night the U.S. was deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and a bomber task force to the Middle East, intending to send a message that “unrelenting force” will meet any attack on American forces or allies.

“The United States is not seeking war with the Iranian regime, but we are fully prepared to respond to any attack, whether by proxy, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or regular Iranian forces,” he said.

Neither Bolton nor other officials would provide any details about the supposed threat, which comes as the Trump administration wages a campaign of intensifying pressure against Iran and nearly a year after it withdrew from an Obama-era nuclear deal with Tehran.

In Iran, the semi-official ISNA news agency on Monday quoted an anonymous official as saying that Iranian President Hassan Rouhani planned a broadcast address Wednesday and might discuss “counteractions” Tehran will take over America’s withdrawal from the international nuclear deal.

The agreement limited Iran’s enrichment of uranium amid Western concerns that Tehran’s program could allow it to build nuclear weapons. Iran insists its program is for peaceful purposes.

With its pressure campaign, the U.S. administration is trying to get Iran to halt activities such as supporting militant activities that destabilize the Middle East and threaten U.S. allies, including Israel, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said.

“Our objective is to get the Islamic Republic of Iran to behave like a normal nation,” Pompeo told reporters during a visit to Finland. “When they do that, we will welcome them back.”

The order to the carrier group would get the Abraham Lincoln into the Middle East about two weeks earlier than initially planned following exercises in the Mediterranean region, according to a U.S. defense official who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly, so spoke on the condition of anonymity. It forces the ships to cancel a planned stop in Croatia.

For years, the U.S. maintained a carrier presence in the Persian Gulf and Middle East region. During the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there were two carriers in the area, but that was reduced to one.

Last year the administration decided to end the continuous carrier presence, and send a strike group only intermittently into the region. The U.S. Navy currently has no aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf.

Bolton said the U.S. wants to send a message that “unrelenting force” will meet any attack on U.S. interests or those of America’s allies.

Jon Alterman, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic & International Studies, questioned whether the U.S. adequately understands Iranian motivations and actions, and whether the military move was warranted.

“I don’t think we should let the Iranians pull our chain at the time and place of their choosing,” he said. “You can communicate seriousness to the Iranians without moving a lot of assets around, because moving assets is expensive and keeps assets from being in other places.”

He added, however, that Iran has the capability to harm Americans, but it’s difficult to assess the situation without knowing more about the intelligence that prompted the move.

Along with the Lincoln, Bolton mentioned “a bomber task force,” which suggested the Pentagon is deploying land-based bomber aircraft somewhere in the region, perhaps on the Arabian Peninsula.

Pompeo said the actions undertaken by the U.S. have been in the works for a while. The request for the accelerated move came over the weekend from the military’s U.S. Central Command after reviewing various intelligence reports for some time, according to the U.S. official. Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan approved the request on Sunday.

“It is absolutely the case that we have seen escalatory actions from the Iranians and it is equally the case that we will hold the Iranians accountable for attacks on American interests,” Pompeo said. “If these actions take place, if they do by some third-party proxy, a militia group, Hezbollah, we will hold the Iranian leadership directly accountable for that.”

Asked about “escalatory actions,” Pompeo replied, “I don’t want to talk about what underlays it, but make no mistake, we have good reason to want to communicate clearly about how the Iranians should understand how we will respond to actions they may take.”

Asked if the Iranian action was related to the deadly events in Gaza and Israel — militants fired rockets into Israel on Sunday and Israel responded with airstrikes — Pompeo said, “It is separate from that.”

The Trump administration has been intensifying its pressure campaign against Iran.

Last month, President Donald Trump announced the U.S. would no longer exempt any countries from U.S. sanctions if they continue to buy Iranian oil, a decision that primarily affects the five remaining major importers: China and India and U.S. treaty allies Japan, South Korea and Turkey.

The U.S. also recently designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group, the first ever for an entire division of another government.

Trump withdrew from the Obama administration’s landmark nuclear deal with Iran in May 2018 and, in the months that followed, reimposed punishing sanctions including those targeting Iran’s oil, shipping and banking sectors.

___

Associated Press writers Robert Burns and Matthew Lee contributed to this report.

Oh, and a new wrinkle, because of course. 

The threat that precipitated Reaper Bolton's issuing of his warning was based on Israeli intelligence (remember when they said they wouldn't share that stuff with us anymore, lol.  Just when it suits their geopolitical interests I guess.), that indicated a threat against US interests in the region. Oh, and those US interests of course, well, Saudi Arabia.

https://www.axios.com/israel-warned-trump-of-possible-iran-plot-bolton-34f25563-c3f3-41ee-a653-9d96b4541984.html

Behind the scenes: Information about possible Iranian plots against the U.S. or its allies in the Gulf were raised two weeks ago in talks held at the White House between an Israeli delegation headed by national security adviser Meir Ben Shabbat and a U.S. team led by Bolton, the Israeli officials told me.

• The intelligence about a possible Iranian plot is not very specific at this stage, but the officials said it was clear the threat was against a U.S. target in the Gulf or U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia or the UAE.

 

 

Scoop: Israel passed White House intelligence on possible Iran plot

 

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu with national security adviser John Bolton. Photo: Kobi Gideon/GPO via Getty Images

Israel passed information on an alleged Iranian plot to attack U.S. interests in the Gulf to the U.S. before national security adviser John Bolton threatened Iran with "unrelenting force" last night, senior Israeli officials told me.

Why it matters: Bolton's unusual and aggressive statement included news that the U.S. would move an aircraft carrier to the region. The officials said intelligence gathered by Israel, primarily by the Mossad intelligence agency, is understood to be part of the reason for Bolton's announcement.

Behind the scenes: Information about possible Iranian plots against the U.S. or its allies in the Gulf were raised two weeks ago in talks held at the White House between an Israeli delegation headed by national security adviser Meir Ben Shabbat and a U.S. team led by Bolton, the Israeli officials told me.

• The intelligence about a possible Iranian plot is not very specific at this stage, but the officials said it was clear the threat was against a U.S. target in the Gulf or U.S. allies like Saudi Arabia or the UAE.

The bottom line: An Israeli official told me Mossad drew several scenarios for what the Iranians might be planning:

"It is still unclear to us what the Iranians are trying to do and how they are planning to do it, but it is clear to us that the Iranian temperature is on the rise as a result of the growing U.S. pressure campaign against them, and they are considering retaliating against U.S. interests in the Gulf."

 

Edited May 7, 2019 by Anastasis
my kingdom for a straight up bbcode editing interface.

[tucker 238]

I am buying Raytheon stock!

Guess Trump is at least Republican in some ways. The desire to start unwinnable wars in the Middle East. 

[berlinerbaer 678]

Muller testifies in congress this month, China talks fail and tariffs go up, sending stocks down, down, down...

When was the last war we started purely as a means of distracting the population? Was it one of the Reagan central American skirmishes? I can't even put Iraq in that category.

[David Dennison 18856]

Wag the dog, baby!

[JohnnyRage 1617]

Did someone tell the Department of Defense yet?

[Degenerate Gardner 4085]

Wait, are we for the IC again?  Or would their endorsement of this wag the dog exercise be the kiss of death?  Who thought being a single issue voter could be so vexing?

[Thetexashammer 1062]

8 minutes ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

Wait, are we for the IC again?  Or would their endorsement of this wag the dog exercise be the kiss of death?  Who thought being a single issue voter could be so vexing?

[F250 28773]

[Anastasis 23469]

1 hour ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

Wait, are we for the IC again?  Or would their endorsement of this wag the dog exercise be the kiss of death?  Who thought being a single issue voter could be so vexing?

[RPM 26320]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Wag the dog, baby!

I'm just waiting for the country song to be debuted on Hannity.

[Junior Miller 1502]

2 hours ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

Wait, are we for the IC again?  Or would their endorsement of this wag the dog exercise be the kiss of death?  Who thought being a single issue voter could be so vexing?

Strange how almost all of the most terrible shit: racism, sexism, homophobia, unnecessary wars, stealing American taxpayer money to give to corporate billionaires, and protecting the rights of mass murderers to have access to assault weapons all seem to align perfectly with republicans. 

[Anastasis 23469]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-deployment-triggered-by-intelligence-warning-of-iranian-attack-plans-11557180106

U.S. Deployment Triggered by Intelligence Warning of Iranian Attack Plans

Unusually specific intelligence reports about fresh Iranian threats to American forces in the Middle East triggered a U.S. military request in the Middle East

(article behind spoiler)

Very specific intelligence: They planned to attack us in one of the many places we have troops stationed around them. Not sure which one. Maybe Iraq, possibly Syria, could be Yemen, Maybe Saudi, or Kuwait. If it was none of those, the target is the oil shipping route.

 

 

By 

Gordon Lubold and 

Michael R. Gordon

Updated May 6, 2019 8:29 p.m. ET

 

U.S. intelligence showed that Iran has made plans to target U.S. forces in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East, triggering a decision to reinforce the American military presence in the region in an effort to deter any possible moves by Tehran, U.S. officials said Monday.

The escalation in tensions came as European diplomats said Monday that Iran appeared poised to breach portions of the 2015 international nuclear pact that restricted Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. That followed a rocket barrage fired into Israel by an Iranian-backed militia in Gaza over the weekend.

Washington has been stepping up pressure on Iran. Last month, the U.S. said it was ending waivers for Iran to export oil to a handful of its largest buyers in a bid to push Iran’s oil exports to zero, and designated Iran’s ideological military arm, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as a foreign terrorist organization.

The new U.S. intelligence showed that Iran drew up plans to target U.S. forces in Iraq and possibly Syria, to orchestrate attacks in the Bab el-Mandeb strait near Yemen through proxies and in the Persian Gulf with its own armed drones, the U.S. officials said. There has also been intelligence that Iran may be seeking to target U.S. forces in Kuwait.

A U.S. official said it was unclear whether the new intelligence indicated operations Tehran planned to carry out imminently or contingency preparations in the case U.S.-Iran tensions erupted into hostilities.

A partial Iranian withdrawal from the nuclear pact would mark Iran’s strongest reaction yet to the U.S. measures aimed at intensifying pressure on Tehran. The Trump administration pulled out of the multicountry deal last year. Iranian officials have previously indicated that Tehran might modify its adherence to the pact if Iran failed to receive the economic benefits it anticipated.

A spokesman for Iran’s Supreme National Security Council dismissed the U.S. military deployment as psychological warfare. President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, in a phone call with Qatar’s emir, called for moderation in international relations, state news agency IRNA reported. He described the Gaza flare-up as “worrisome.”

The additional U.S. military capabilities in the Middle East were requested by Gen. Kenneth McKenzie Jr., the head of U.S. Central Command, after intelligence indicated the emergence of the threat to U.S. forces, the military officials said. In response, the Trump administration is sending an aircraft carrier strike group and four to six bombers as extra force to the region.

As recently as last week, there were no obvious signs of a new threat, officials said.

But that changed dramatically after a fresh intelligence assessment late Friday showed there were “multiple threat streams” and that U.S. forces might be in danger in Iraq and possibly in other Middle East nations like Syria and Kuwait, officials said.

The threats included concerns from both land and water, officials said. U.S. officials said they were struck by the specificity of the Iranian plans and the fact that Americans were mentioned as potential targets.

Gen. McKenzie requested the additional forces to send a signal to Tehran that it would be held responsible if either its regular military, the Guard Corps or even Iranian proxies operating in Iraq or elsewhere attempted to do harm to U.S. forces, military officials said.

Patriot antimissile systems may also be sent, some officials said.

 

Iran long has backed several Shiite militias in Iraq, including Kataib Hezbollah and Asaib Ahl al-Haq. It has backed Hezbollah and other Shiite militias who are operating in Syria, and the U.S. accuses it of arming the Houthis in Yemen.

 

The U.S. military officials said that the intent is to send a clear message to Iran to “think before they do something against U.S. forces in the region.”

“In this case, Centcom said that it was serious enough that [McKenzie] requested the carrier and the bomber task force be sent,” a senior U.S. military official said. “Ultimately, they are who requested the support.”

There are between 5,000 and 7,000 U.S. forces operating in Iraq, more than 1,000 in Syria and more in Kuwait, according to officials.

Acting Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan in Twitter messages Monday called the deployment a “prudent repositioning” based on a credible threat.

During the eight-year war in Iraq, Iraqi Shiite militias that were trained and equipped by Iran with powerful roadside bombs targeted U.S. forces and killed at least 603 U.S. troops, according to figures recently released by the Trump administration.

Some of that training was carried out by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps at three bases near Tehran, Qais al-Khazali, a prominent Shiite figure in Iraq, told U.S. interrogators in 2007.

In recent years, however, U.S. forces and Iranian-backed militias in Iraq have maintained an informal truce and concentrated on their common foe: Islamic State militants. U.S. officials believed that Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s paramilitary Quds Force, had backed that truce.

The concern of U.S. military officers is that Iran may call off the truce and unleash the Shiite militias now that the Trump administration had designated the Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization and is trying to drive Iran’s oil experts to zero and apply other forms of economic pressure on Tehran.

Lawmakers who opposed the decision to designate the Guard Corps as a terrorist organization warned it could make it harder for U.S. personnel to operate in Iraq.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat who recently returned from a trip to Iraq, said Monday that decision was “an unnecessary poke in the eye” that had made it harder for U.S. diplomats and other personnel in the country to do their jobs.

 

That the source of the concern was the U.S. military and not top White House officials provides more credibility to the threat the intelligence assessment showed, officials said. National Security Adviser John Bolton, long known as an Iran hawk, last year asked the Pentagon to assemble a strike package against targets in Iran, but no action was ever taken, The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year.

The carrier strike group USS Abraham Lincoln, which typically includes the carrier, three destroyers and a cruiser, left Norfolk, Va. in early April. It was headed around the world and was expected in the U.S. Central Command region later this month.

Under new U.S. orders, the carrier is expected to forego some port visits, including in Croatia, and should be inside the Persian Gulf within the next 48 hours.

Write to Gordon Lubold at Gordon.Lubold@wsj.com and Michael R. Gordon at michael.gordon@wsj.com

Appeared in the May 7, 2019, print edition as 'New Iran Threats Led to U.S. Action.'

 

Very specific intelligence: They planned to attack us in one of the many places we have troops stationed around them. Not sure which one. Maybe Iraq, possibly Syria, could be Yemen, Maybe Saudi, or Kuwait. If it was none of those, the target is the oil shipping route.

Edited May 7, 2019 by Anastasis

[GRHorn 105]

This is a terrible idea. Could actually be the downfall of Trump. 

[GRHorn 105]

6 hours ago, Junior Miller said:

Strange how almost all of the most terrible shit: racism, sexism, homophobia, unnecessary wars, stealing American taxpayer money to give to corporate billionaires, and protecting the rights of mass murderers to have access to assault weapons all seem to align perfectly with republicans. 

Nice troll of #bothsides Surly. 

[atomheartbevo 89660]

So we are supposed to believe that Iran was planning to attack the military of the United States of America. 

[atomheartbevo 89660]

So is O. Henry Middle School’s Football Team planning on calling up Tom Herman and telling him they are going to destroy UT’s football team?

What’s next, is aggy going to contend for their division this year?

[bernorange 8361]

If you are wondering about the timing of this, I submit:

Quote

US President Donald Trump has decided to end exemptions from sanctions for countries still buying oil from Iran.

The White House said waivers for China, India, Japan, South Korea and Turkey would expire in May, after which they could face US sanctions themselves.

...

More:  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-48011496

I suspect this move is to show China, India, Japan, South Korea and Turkey (and Europe really*) that the USA is serious about shutting down the Iranian oil trade.

*=

Quote

...
A big source of contention for both Washington and Tehran is Instex, a special-purpose vehicle unveiled by Paris, Berlin and London in January. Its ultimate ambitions are bold: to keep trade between Iran and Europe going without relying on cross-border financial transactions (which might fall foul of the U.S.). ...

More:  https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-05-02/iran-europe-sidesteps-the-u-s-finance-system-with-instex

[pacman 7355]

41 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

This is a terrible idea. Could actually be the downfall of Trump. 

War monger Presidents get re-elected...

[GRHorn 105]

15 minutes ago, pacman said:

War monger Presidents get re-elected...

I’ll speak for myself as a reluctant Trump supporters in the last election, but I think my thoughts echo a lot of others. Two big reasons we voted for Trump. 

1) Conservative SC justices. He’s done pretty well here. One of the things that he’s held up his end of the bargain  

2) His relatively unorthodox, less interventionist foreign policy. He’s had a few smaller strikes against this one, but to initiate a new conflict in the Middle East with the neocons biggest prize is a huge one. Same old, same old. Gonna turn off some supporters for sure. 

[wildcat09 29354]

If Trump wanted to hurt the revolutionary guard he could simply stop doing business with them.

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

Trump Tower Tehran is never going to happen if he keeps up this bullshit.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

This is all bullshit and a distraction.  We’re not going to war with Iran. 

[Brisketexan 105129]

Say what you will, but back in 1980, the lyric "we did it to Japan, we can do it to Iran" hit my "that's just wrong" funny bone.  Of course, I was like 10, so there's that.

[relapse98 634]

1 hour ago, pacman said:

War monger Presidents get re-elected...

 

Edited May 7, 2019 by relapse98

[pacman 7355]

[UTCzech III 2907]

27 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Say what you will, but back in 1980, the lyric "we did it to Japan, we can do it to Iran" hit my "that's just wrong" funny bone.  Of course, I was like 10, so there's that.

Vince Vance & the Valiants, baby!

[Foosters 17856]

Were they planning on attacking us? Oh, who knows. But I for one, would rather not wait to find out.

[F250 28773]

30 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

 

Not a war monger. He got in and out of Kuwait fairly quickly and resisted the pressure to cross the Iraqi border. He could have really milked that shit but he didn't.

[relapse98 634]

1 minute ago, F250 said:

Not a war monger. He got in and out of Kuwait fairly quickly and resisted the pressure to cross the Iraqi border. He could have really milked that shit but he didn't.

Wasn't our fight. We shouldn't have been there to start with.

[Anastasis 23469]

A U.S. official said it was unclear whether the new intelligence indicated operations Tehran planned to carry out imminently or contingency preparations in the case U.S.-Iran tensions erupted into hostilities.

Imagine if every country that we had contingency preparations related to the eruption of hostilities became belligerent and deployed military resources against us in a threatening way as a show of force.  Jesus FN Christ.  This is no way to interface with the world.  

[High Plains Drifter 11049]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-deployment-triggered-by-intelligence-warning-of-iranian-attack-plans-11557180106

U.S. Deployment Triggered by Intelligence Warning of Iranian Attack Plans

Unusually specific intelligence reports about fresh Iranian threats to American forces in the Middle East triggered a U.S. military request in the Middle East

(article behind spoiler)

Very specific intelligence: They planned to attack us in one of the many places we have troops stationed around them. Not sure which one. Maybe Iraq, possibly Syria, could be Yemen, Maybe Saudi, or Kuwait. If it was none of those, the target is the oil shipping route.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

By 

Gordon Lubold and 

Michael R. Gordon

Updated May 6, 2019 8:29 p.m. ET

 

U.S. intelligence showed that Iran has made plans to target U.S. forces in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East, triggering a decision to reinforce the American military presence in the region in an effort to deter any possible moves by Tehran, U.S. officials said Monday.

The escalation in tensions came as European diplomats said Monday that Iran appeared poised to breach portions of the 2015 international nuclear pact that restricted Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. That followed a rocket barrage fired into Israel by an Iranian-backed militia in Gaza over the weekend.

Washington has been stepping up pressure on Iran. Last month, the U.S. said it was ending waivers for Iran to export oil to a handful of its largest buyers in a bid to push Iran’s oil exports to zero, and designated Iran’s ideological military arm, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as a foreign terrorist organization.

The new U.S. intelligence showed that Iran drew up plans to target U.S. forces in Iraq and possibly Syria, to orchestrate attacks in the Bab el-Mandeb strait near Yemen through proxies and in the Persian Gulf with its own armed drones, the U.S. officials said. There has also been intelligence that Iran may be seeking to target U.S. forces in Kuwait.

A U.S. official said it was unclear whether the new intelligence indicated operations Tehran planned to carry out imminently or contingency preparations in the case U.S.-Iran tensions erupted into hostilities.

A partial Iranian withdrawal from the nuclear pact would mark Iran’s strongest reaction yet to the U.S. measures aimed at intensifying pressure on Tehran. The Trump administration pulled out of the multicountry deal last year. Iranian officials have previously indicated that Tehran might modify its adherence to the pact if Iran failed to receive the economic benefits it anticipated.

A spokesman for Iran’s Supreme National Security Council dismissed the U.S. military deployment as psychological warfare. President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, in a phone call with Qatar’s emir, called for moderation in international relations, state news agency IRNA reported. He described the Gaza flare-up as “worrisome.”

The additional U.S. military capabilities in the Middle East were requested by Gen. Kenneth McKenzie Jr., the head of U.S. Central Command, after intelligence indicated the emergence of the threat to U.S. forces, the military officials said. In response, the Trump administration is sending an aircraft carrier strike group and four to six bombers as extra force to the region.

As recently as last week, there were no obvious signs of a new threat, officials said.

But that changed dramatically after a fresh intelligence assessment late Friday showed there were “multiple threat streams” and that U.S. forces might be in danger in Iraq and possibly in other Middle East nations like Syria and Kuwait, officials said.

The threats included concerns from both land and water, officials said. U.S. officials said they were struck by the specificity of the Iranian plans and the fact that Americans were mentioned as potential targets.

Gen. McKenzie requested the additional forces to send a signal to Tehran that it would be held responsible if either its regular military, the Guard Corps or even Iranian proxies operating in Iraq or elsewhere attempted to do harm to U.S. forces, military officials said.

Patriot antimissile systems may also be sent, some officials said.

 

Iran long has backed several Shiite militias in Iraq, including Kataib Hezbollah and Asaib Ahl al-Haq. It has backed Hezbollah and other Shiite militias who are operating in Syria, and the U.S. accuses it of arming the Houthis in Yemen.

 

The U.S. military officials said that the intent is to send a clear message to Iran to “think before they do something against U.S. forces in the region.”

“In this case, Centcom said that it was serious enough that [McKenzie] requested the carrier and the bomber task force be sent,” a senior U.S. military official said. “Ultimately, they are who requested the support.”

There are between 5,000 and 7,000 U.S. forces operating in Iraq, more than 1,000 in Syria and more in Kuwait, according to officials.

Acting Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan in Twitter messages Monday called the deployment a “prudent repositioning” based on a credible threat.

During the eight-year war in Iraq, Iraqi Shiite militias that were trained and equipped by Iran with powerful roadside bombs targeted U.S. forces and killed at least 603 U.S. troops, according to figures recently released by the Trump administration.

Some of that training was carried out by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps at three bases near Tehran, Qais al-Khazali, a prominent Shiite figure in Iraq, told U.S. interrogators in 2007.

In recent years, however, U.S. forces and Iranian-backed militias in Iraq have maintained an informal truce and concentrated on their common foe: Islamic State militants. U.S. officials believed that Qassem Soleimani, the commander of Iran’s paramilitary Quds Force, had backed that truce.

The concern of U.S. military officers is that Iran may call off the truce and unleash the Shiite militias now that the Trump administration had designated the Guard Corps as a foreign terrorist organization and is trying to drive Iran’s oil experts to zero and apply other forms of economic pressure on Tehran.

Lawmakers who opposed the decision to designate the Guard Corps as a terrorist organization warned it could make it harder for U.S. personnel to operate in Iraq.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat who recently returned from a trip to Iraq, said Monday that decision was “an unnecessary poke in the eye” that had made it harder for U.S. diplomats and other personnel in the country to do their jobs.

 

That the source of the concern was the U.S. military and not top White House officials provides more credibility to the threat the intelligence assessment showed, officials said. National Security Adviser John Bolton, long known as an Iran hawk, last year asked the Pentagon to assemble a strike package against targets in Iran, but no action was ever taken, The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this year.

The carrier strike group USS Abraham Lincoln, which typically includes the carrier, three destroyers and a cruiser, left Norfolk, Va. in early April. It was headed around the world and was expected in the U.S. Central Command region later this month.

Under new U.S. orders, the carrier is expected to forego some port visits, including in Croatia, and should be inside the Persian Gulf within the next 48 hours.

Write to Gordon Lubold at Gordon.Lubold@wsj.com and Michael R. Gordon at michael.gordon@wsj.com

Appeared in the May 7, 2019, print edition as 'New Iran Threats Led to U.S. Action.'

 

Very specific intelligence: They planned to attack us in one of the many places we have troops stationed around them. Not sure which one. Maybe Iraq, possibly Syria, could be Yemen, Maybe Saudi, or Kuwait. If it was none of those, the target is the oil shipping route.

 

Is this the same intelligence that is part of the deep state?

[F250 28773]

3 minutes ago, relapse98 said:

Wasn't our fight. We shouldn't have been there to start with.

That doesn't make him a warmonger. He didn't have a policy of foreign intervention like Reagan or his son Dubya. In fact, his administration was unwelcoming to the hawkish neoconservatives that thrived under Reagan and Dubya.

[Anastasis 23469]

2 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

Is this the same intelligence that is part of the deep state?

I don't think that I have ever used the term "deep state" here, so you'll have to make that call.

 

What I do think that this is, however, is the typical intersection of the intelligence and military industrial complex in the context of a total fucking shit for brains foreign policy posture.  That is to say, the exact same type of nonsense that got us into the Iraq war and has generally contributed to the creation of a total cluster fuck in the middle east. 

[wildcat09 29354]

The line on Bolton manufacturing bullshit intelligence to create a pretext for going to war with Iran was at least -150 when he was hired.

[Anastasis 23469]

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The line on Bolton manufacturing bullshit intelligence to create a pretext for going to war with Iran was at least -150 when he was hired.

Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. ETA: -150 would have been far to loose of a line. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/11_november/20/ws_johnbolton.shtml

Quote

US Arms Control Under-Secretary says US "confident" Iraq has hidden weapons of mass destruction

 

John Bolton, United States Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, today said the US is "confident" Iraq has hidden weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapons, and production facilities.

 

Speaking as part of a special BBC World Service debate on the Iraq conflict he said: "There's a strong chance that UN weapons inspections will work.

 

"The US has already decided the outcome of this story - Saddam will be left with no weapons of mass destruction - but how that point is reached is up to Saddam Hussein.

 

"The US has supplied all the political support the UN teams need and they will also supply them with US gathered information on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."

 

Bolton said: "We are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass destruction and production facilities in Iraq.

 

"We will wait and see what the December 8th declaration says but there is no doubt that Saddam is a threat to the region and needs to be disarmed.

 

"Iraq is already in breach of resolution 1441 by its attacks on coalition air forces. This is not an effort to add up how many times they breach resolution 1441, the real question is whether there is a sustained effort at co-operation."

 

He added: "There is no doubt in our mind that Saddam Hussein has an active chemical and biological warfare effort.

 

"The evidence is there - the question is whether the inspectors are allowed to find it."

 

On the point of whether the aim of the US was regime change in Iraq, John Bolton said: "If Saddam Hussein fully disarms his country of these weapons of mass destruction that is a kind of regime change.

 

"But the end of the story is clear here. And if Saddam Hussein does not co-operate we have made it clear this is the last chance for him.

 

"We are not going to go through 10 more years of obstructionism in an effort to keep these weapons of mass destruction. But let there be no doubt that this is the central issue - a disarmed Iraq."

 

He added: "I think the Iraqi people would be unique in history if they didn't welcome the overthrow of this dictatorial regime.

 

"And Iraqi opposition leaders of a variety of positions and views are discussing now what will happen after Saddam Hussein.

 

"I expect that the American role actually will be fairly minimal. I think we'll have an important security role.

 

"I think concluding the destruction of the weapons of mass destruction themselves will be important.

 

"But I think fundamentally the recreation of a hopefully democratic Iraqi government - that must rest with the Iraqis.

 

"I think they are fully competent to do it, I think it's a difficult task given the complete absence of free political institutions in Iraq but it's fundamentally up to them."

Edited May 7, 2019 by Anastasis

[hayden_horn 11362]

25 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

A U.S. official said it was unclear whether the new intelligence indicated operations Tehran planned to carry out imminently or contingency preparations in the case U.S.-Iran tensions erupted into hostilities.

Imagine if every country that we had contingency preparations related to the eruption of hostilities became belligerent and deployed military resources against us in a threatening way as a show of force.  Jesus FN Christ.  This is no way to interface with the world.  

seriously. this is madness.

EVERY country builds contingencies. it's their leadership's fiduciary responsibility!

trump has shown signs of wanting to flex on iran for a couple of years now. he hated the nuclear deal, scrapped that as a sign to iran that he was not fucking around.

he needs his CiC moment, at all cost. madness.

[Asithappens 974]

11 hours ago, F250 said:

Good article in The New Yorker by Dexter Filkins.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/05/06/john-bolton-on-the-warpath

[Captainant 27664]

14 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

seriously. this is madness.

EVERY country builds contingencies. it's their leadership's fiduciary responsibility!

trump has shown signs of wanting to flex on iran for a couple of years now. he hated the nuclear deal, scrapped that as a sign to iran that he was not fucking around.

he needs his CiC moment, at all cost. madness.

 

a tweet for every occasion.

Edited May 7, 2019 by Captainant

[High Plains Drifter 11049]

32 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I don't think that I have ever used the term "deep state" here, so you'll have to make that call.

 

What I do think that this is, however, is the typical intersection of the intelligence and military industrial complex in the context of a total fucking shit for brains foreign policy posture.  That is to say, the exact same type of nonsense that got us into the Iraq war and has generally contributed to the creation of a total cluster fuck in the middle east. 

 

I wasn't calling you out, I was making a tired statement about our DOTARD in Chief.

 

I agree with the second paragraph 100%.

[Anastasis 23469]

1 minute ago, High Plains Drifter said:

I wasn't calling you out,

Fight me!

[elfenix 34238]

Quote

Iran drew up plans to target U.S. forces in Iraq and possibly Syria, to orchestrate attacks in the Bab el-Mandeb strait near Yemen through proxies and in the Persian Gulf with its own armed drones

does iran not have a general staff whose job it is to draw up plans like this?  the pentagon has plans drawn up to invade canada but that doesn't mean that it's anywhere near thinkable that we'd actually do it. 

[Brisketexan 105129]

2 minutes ago, elfenix said:

does iran not have a general staff whose job it is to draw up plans like this?  the pentagon has plans drawn up to invade canada but that doesn't mean that it's anywhere near thinkable that we'd actually do it. 

That's what they WANT you to think....but it's time.....

[Dirk X West 772]

2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

I’ll speak for myself as a reluctant Trump supporters in the last election, but I think my thoughts echo a lot of others. Two big reasons we voted for Trump. 

1) Conservative SC justices. He’s done pretty well here. One of the things that he’s held up his end of the bargain  

2) His relatively unorthodox, less interventionist foreign policy. He’s had a few smaller strikes against this one, but to initiate a new conflict in the Middle East with the neocons biggest prize is a huge one. Same old, same old. Gonna turn off some supporters for sure. 

Lots of motherfucking laughs @ #2.  

[SquishMitten 10406]

3 hours ago, GRHorn said:

This is a terrible idea. Could actually be the downfall of Trump. 

I'm going to briefly set aside the story below that this may just be normal contingency planning by Iran. If there is evidence that it may be something more imminent, we failed to send the carrier group, and a base was overrun...I think THAT could actually be his downfall. 

Now back to this possibly being normal contingency plans...then this is absolutely absurd. But nobody is going to care about that because it will be spun into 'Murica! soon enough. 

[Zavala 1384]

https://www.axios.com/israel-warned-trump-of-possible-iran-plot-bolton-34f25563-c3f3-41ee-a653-9d96b4541984.html

[wildcat09 29354]

6 minutes ago, Dirk X West said:

Lots of motherfucking laughs @ #2.  

Seriously. This dipshit means to tell us he’s surprised that the guy who advocated for murdering the family members of alleged terrorists and asked his advisors why we shouldn’t nuke other people may actually be a warmonger?

[F250 28773]

1 hour ago, Asithappens said:

Good article in The New Yorker by Dexter Filkins.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/05/06/john-bolton-on-the-warpath

I didn't know this about Bolton but I am not surprised.

 

Yale was riven by the Vietnam War, which Bolton supported, at least rhetorically. The draft board was calling up tens of thousands of college-age men to serve, and Bolton preëmpted the possibility by joining the Maryland National Guard. In his memoir, he explained that he felt that the war had already been lost, by liberals who had prevented America from doing what it needed to do to win. “I wasn’t going to waste time on a futile struggle,” Bolton wrote. “Dying for your country was one thing, but dying to gain territory that antiwar forces in Congress would simply return to the enemy seemed ludicrous to me. Looking back, I am not terribly proud of this calculation.”

[Asithappens 974]

3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

That's what they WANT you to think....but it's time.....

Like maple syrup, Canada's evil oozes over the United States.

[Underdog 28627]

[Lagunamadre 1975]

4 hours ago, Asithappens said:

Good article in The New Yorker by Dexter Filkins.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/05/06/john-bolton-on-the-warpath

Dexter Filkins is the fucking man. If you want an unbiased read on the Iraq war, pick yourself up a copy of "The Forever War". Excellent book. Dexter lived in Iraq for three years during the height of the conflict. Rolled around with our troops during the battle of Fallujah. To say he saw some shit would be an understatement.