Imminent attack on Iran

Complete media blackout.  Why is the media failing to report of an imminent attack on Iran?  Red flags are raised, the alarm bells are ringing.
First, we have *CENSORED* Cheney making the rounds in the Middle East, in the guise of rallying peace in the region.  The trip serves one purpose, to assess the support of US allies in the region.  McCain has even toured the region recently, rallying up support for the war cause.  Bush made the visit earlier this year.
Admiral Fallon has resigned his post as head of Cent Com.  Fallon has been outspoken in his views against an attack on Iran.  He has either resigned in protest, knowing the imminent attack is unavoidable, or pushed out by the administration to clear all obstacles.
Chief of Russia's general staff, Yuri Baluyevsky, said last November that Russia was beefing up it's military in response to US aggression.  Russian Colonel General Leonid Ivashov has said that the Pentagon is planning a massive air strike on Iran.
Saudi Arabia, after Cheney's visit, has begun preparing national plans to deal with nuclear and radioactive hazards in the aftermath of a perceived US attack on Iran's Bushehr reactor.
The recent crackdown on Shiite militas by the US backed Iraqi leadership under Maliki seems to aim at crushing factions that Iran might support to cause chaos for US troops in Iraq after the attack on Iran.
Seymour Hersh is one of the few journalist that has exposed the ongoing planning by the Bush Administration, Neocons, and Pentagon of drawing up war plans for Iran.
The tolls from the Iraq War is already 4,000 brave US soldiers dead, tens of thousands wounded, and probably hundreds of thousands having serious health problems in the years to come from exposure to depleted uranium.  An estimated 1 million Iraqi deaths are attributed to the War.  If war breaks out with Iran, expect a high increase in US casualty, and high collateral damage, unimaginable civilian carnage.
What should the sleeping citizens of America do?  Demand impeachment hearings of Bush and Cheney from your local Congressman.  If impeached, hand them over to the Nuremberg Courts.  Of course this will never be allowed.  Pay our troops real wages, stop giving it to private military contractors with six figure salaries, give that money to our troops as bonuses.

Vinia wrote:

Pfft.. if they were UK squaddies they'd have done it naked!

Oh, I've got a brand new shiny helmet and a pair of kinky boots
I've got a lovely new flak jacket and a lovely khaki suit
And when we go on night patrol we hold each others hands...

<_<
>_>

/flee

lol @ Conspiracy

Some talking points:
-Recent beefing up of US Navy presence in the Mediterranean.  US Destroyers equipped with Aegis are off the coast of Lebanon and Syria.
-The Destroyers are probably intended to shield our ally Israel from missile attacks from Iran/Syria in retaliation of a possible joint US/Israel strike on Iran.
-Possible scenarios:
    *Pearl Harbor like surprise attack by either a joint US/Israel strike or solely by the US.
    *Provoking Iran into attacking our US ships in the Persian Gulf, probably at the Strait of Hormuz.
-If an attack occurred, there will be no debate, no US Secretary of State going to the UN Security Council to ask permission, no vote of approval by the public.  The President will give the order, and 12 hrs later our bombers will drop their payload on Iran.

Try reading these:

Seymour Hersh article
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/20...7/060417fa_fact

Article on Admiral William Fallon
http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon


Saudi plan for nuclear fallout from attack on Iran
http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_d...il.php?id=19881

A conspiracy nutjob?  This is just an opinion I'm forming based on conclusions I'm drawing from actual facts.  So everyone is called a conspiracy nutjob when we're trying to alert others of the possibility of another misguided war?
First, yes I know almost all destroyers have Aegis, and I know the functionality of what an Aegis system does.  We've sold outdated ships to Taiwan equipped with Aegis a few yrs ago and Beijing had a fit.  My point was that the US Navy has repositioned destroyers in the MEDITERRANEAN SEA, not the PERSIAN GULF.  We have far more US Naval presence in the PERSIAN GULF than just a couple destroyers armed with the Aegis system.  And if you want me to be more specific, the two destroyers in the MEDITERRANEAN SEA are the USS Ross and the USS Philippine Sea.  Please read what I've written before misquoting me next time.  I never stated that having US destroyers in the Gulf with Aegis was provoking Iran, those ships are off the coast of Lebanon and Syria, and clearly are antagonizing Iran's allies.  An Aegis system is not outdated in that region of the world, again it serves to protect our allies in the region from incoming missile attacks.
In addition, my conclusions are NOT solely based on the destroyers having an Aegis system redeployed in the MEDITERRANEAN, but many other factors in addition to that.
Interesting that you've brought up the Gulf of Tonkin.  During the past few years, more classified information about the incident has now been declassified, and a general consensus is that Lyndon Johnson lied to Congress and coerced the US into an escalation in Vietnam.  Same happened with the Spanish American War in the late 1890's.  Brilliant analogy Night.

Again, I didn't mean to imply anything about you Night, and this is just an opinion.  The only thing I ask is that you refrain from name calling, and attack my opinions with constructive criticism.  I don't form my opinions and thoughts by what I read from someone else's post on the internet.  Like you, I enjoyed reading about military history and tactics before.  My stances come from reading foreign policy briefs, think tank analysis, and comparing US and foreign news.  Of course I always filter the information I take in, not going to be a sheeple and just follow what someone else says.  I'm not making any Nostradamus esque predictions, this is just a perceived danger, and an opinion.

General Petraeus is heading to Capital Hill and giving an assessment on the progress in Iraq.  Unfortunately he'll be linking Iran fighting a proxy war with the US through the Iraq theatre.  Iran will be pictured as being responsible for the Shia militias who are in battles with the US backed Maliki forces.  Maliki was the one who launched the ill advised offensive to secure his party's position before local elections to be held soon.  I expect the media outlets using the same slogans of "proxy war" and linking Iran to the instability in Iraq.  Democrats and Republicans in Congress will swarm around the Bush Administration in supporting an attack on Iran.  Why?  Democrat and Republican Senators and Reps have profited near $200 million from their investments in defense companies, eager to hand out more war contracts.