Why is it okay for Bush and his minons to run around making threats, declaring various countries' enemies' and threatening them with destruction, but that anybody responding must be destroyed?
Why can the US an Israel have nukes, but not anybody else?
And most of all, why do so many people seem to assume that these threatened countries have not made any moves to defend themselves?
The pro US mob seem to think that it takes tons of whizz bang hardware to inflict damage upon the US. I think that with a little forward planning any state could take out a US city or two.
I also think, judging by the hysterical reaction to 9/11, that if 2 US cities were taken out, the US would be ungovernable.
Perhaps the US ought to begin being a lot more cautious.

peter hindrup, bondi junction, Australia

A question of negotiation was answered “...We've been TRYING that route to absolutely no success!”

Actually, in May 2003, via the Swiss ambassador, the reformist Khatami government supported by supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei offered broad negotiations, including “how to disarm the Hezbollah, how to end support to Hamas and Islamic Jihad, how to open up the nuclear program, how to help the United States stabilize Iraq...and...recognition of the two-state solution [Israel + Palestine].”
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/printer_022707J.shtml

But, Peace in the Middle East was rejected by Karl Rove. - Prof. Noam Chomsky http://www.counterpunch.org/chomsky08162006.html
This rebuff to Khatami, who'd supported the US against Al Qaeda and Taliban, led to the 2005 election of the extremist Ahmadinejad, who “rode to power on Iranian reactions to the steady insult from America.” http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/09/24/ny_site_transcends_boundaries/

Ken V., California, USA

Dan, you still need to have a plan. Based on your brain power we should just show up with the border and figure out things from there. As they say "Brilliant".

The time/battle space equation is extremely complex and the precision, speed and lethality of today's weaponry requires more planning and preparation than ever. Grow up and take your childish comments elsewhere. Compared to the firepower it wields, the US military does extremely well thank you very much.

Thomas - my thoughts exactly. By owning the territory (respective to 5 years ago) on either side of Iran, we can put them in a serious pinch at a moment's notice. They're only way out is through Russia. Not exactly promising, but much better than it used to be. It’s getting harder to a mullah or a supreme leader these days. It’s about time.

I wonder what would happen if the US just decided to occupy
about 1,000 square miles of Iran in a nuclear sensitive area....

Dave, Milwaukee, WI, USA

“No plan survives contact with the enemy.” So it is little comfort to hear that the US military has a 'plan' for Iran. Please remember that we are dealing with an organisation that stil managed to shoot Canadian troops wearing green uniforms in a desert, and British troops displaying bright orange air recognition markers on their vehicles, as well as ordering a tankbuster aircraft strike on one of it's own special forces teams, captured on camera by the accompanying journalists. I personally wouldn't trust them with a pair of scissors.

Dan, Oxford, England

How can you knuckleheads equate the Checkmate activity to how the Iraq war is being executed is beyond histerical. Checkmate planning is for the "air campaiagn" - not the follow on ground prosecution. By all measures, the air campaigns have been flawless in their intent and results.

Dennis, Ft Worth, TX

It's instructive to consider how the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have given war planners open air corridors on the east and west sides of Iran. Unchallenged overflight is a great tactical advantage for surprise, greatly increasing the possible directions from which air strikes may originate. If bases within Iraq and Afghanistan were utilized, cruise missile/bomber strikes could be off the ground and over targets inside Iran in a matter of minutes with sorties originating from multiple directions. Less time in the air is less time for detection and even less for reaction on the ground. More directions yields more confusion.

To suggest Bush didn't have Iran on his mind when he made the case to invade Iraq is a bit self-deceiving, I'd say. Iran has been THE rogue element in the Mid East for years. In my opinion Iraq and Afghanistan have simply been side shows, pretexts for establishing beachheads and precursors to the main event.

Thomas, Atlanta, GA, USA

Shouldn't they be called 'a not so secret Air Force team' seeing as I'm reading about them on the Times website.

Iain Cobain, Liverpool, England

Obviously many americans haven't learned a single thing from the Iraq catatrophe, that they want to commit to another disastrous campaign which will not bode well for anyone. Has all common sense been drained ?

bored goat, Cairo,

Get ready for WW III. And it is the US that is instigating this at the behest of one man, who is not even the president i.e. Dick Cheney.

John Taylor , London,

"Project checkmate? Is that some sort of joke. George Bush is not man enough to attack Iran. "

Very naieve, sadly for all of us, Bush has shown that when he believes the US is thretened enough he will do just that. We can only hope the iranians realsie this and back of far enough so that no war is needed. But Bush will launch that attack once Iran is definitively proven (to his satsifaction) of having or about to get Nukes.

Bush is not a loon, he is a patriot and believes it is his duty to protect America (as it is) and will do so using any and all means he deems necessary.

Neil Murphy, cromer,

If the group is secret how come we all now know about it. Its so secret we know what their agenda is and who they report to.

Charlie, London, UK

Hey great. Whats Centcoms plan when China invades Taiwan during the early hours of the morning of the closing ceremony of the 2008 Olympics. China will close its borders because of a percieved terror threat, news blackout in mainland China and a cyber attack to disrupt communications. The result, an agreement will quickly take place behind closed doors, borders will open and China will have Taiwan. Heard it before ? Don't forget you heard it from me first.

DaveFinlay, on my bike in Asia, now in Thailand

I find this article most intresting. Daily, I read the NY Times,Los Angeles Times,Wall Street Journal and Washington Post ,and have not seen one article relating to
this subject.
If by chance this issue accelerated,there would be massive
riots / demonstrations in every town and city,and on every
college / university campus in the United States.
Sixty three percent of Americans are against the Iraq war.
Health Care is becoming the prime issue in the upcoming
presidential election.

Joe L., Columbia, Maryland , U.S.A

How is it so many calmly accept this kind of thing?

It is nothing less than state terror against a nation that has attacked no one.

Meanwhile, the Pentagon sits next door to Iran in Iraq, having made a horrible mess of the place.

And Israel sits on an arsenal of nuclear weapons no one in any authority questions.

JOHN CHUCKMAN, Toronto, Canada

There is no harm in preparing for the worst case scenario. Are we so naive to believe we are not already under attack from Iran covertly every day in Iraq. Such preperations back in 2001 may have prevented 911 from happening.

Paul Tranter, South Shields, England

Iran has little to worry about, the Times, the Guardian, the New York Times as well as every other Liberal organization across the globe is working feverishly to uncover any details of a military operation and will provide it to the terrorist States free of charge. The creation of the Islamic Caliphate is well under way.

davecatbone, Cincinnati, OH, USA

The comments of the US citizens make me shiver!

It shows that the US has no culture, common sense, education or humanity.

The US is the "threat" to humanity and we will have to deal with it.

Guenter, Holualoa, USA/HI

So secret even the Times know it! I don't think so.

Rob, Brum, West Mids

Iran has decided that Israel must be destroyed. Islamic Revolution in Iran began in 1979 and has consolidated control over the nation. Clerics, the faithful and politicians in Islamic Republic of Iran have expressed their determination to proselytize or exterminate all Jews and Christians. Islamic believers have migrated to all Western Nations and the basis for eventual control world-wide. Ayatollah Khomeini successfully led the Revolution and deposed the Shah in January 1979. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's manifest destiny of Iran is to control Iraq and the Middle East. Iran's control over oil can economically impair the United States. America’s leaders have done nothing for this eventual energy crisis. The Islamic-Arab countries see us as helpless and easy to defeat -- not in war with bombs but with oil control. The nuclear bomb soon to be produced and proliferated by Iran will be a clincher in dominating the Middle East and humbling America.

Lloyd Smiley, Vero Beach, Florida

I believe an Iranian nuclear bomb became inevitable when US has given the technology and means to produce nuclear arms to Israel. If Israel has it, how could you convince Iran that they have no rights?
Diplomacy is the only way to kee this under control and try to rebuild peace in Middle East.

Yelena, Moscow, Russia

After Iran...who's next? North Korea has been developing a nuclear weapon and are we going after them? It's interesting that the ONLY nation to ever drop a nuclear weapon is the United States. We are worried that if Iran develops a BOMB that they will sell some of them to hostile nations. We say our justification for knowing this is they are providing Iraq insurgents with weapons. But, it's ok for the US to sell weapons to other nations for use. Are we so righteous that we can do what we forbid others to do? Are we in Iraq to help the people or steal their oil? Does war justify our need for it?
Is America so limited in it's intelligence that we can't develop alternative fuels so we have less dependence on oil? Is this what our WARS are all about. How is it America is RIGHT and everyone else (who doesn't agree with US(A)) is wrong? Such questions are dividing OUR country like never before...again we are hearing LOVE IT or LEAVE IT...and willing to KILL to prove it.

Fred, Denver, Colorado, USA

There are so many parallels in international history one could draw upon as reference points to the current discourse re: Iran. The most obviously is pre-WW2 Germany and the rise of Hitler to power. The blatant disregard for teaties, which framed the military and political structure Germany was to follow. Here in 2007, we have a country in defiance of sanctions, advancing a program to enhance its military and political influence. Further, a country lead by a man with the stated intent to destroy others in pursuit of policial and religious hegemony in the Middle East and to a degree extend that reach to the world. Our salvation in his words is a world wide conversion to Islam. Our salvation is pursuit of political, economic and if all else fails military options to contain his ambitions. Will the world and US respond as Neville Chamberlain - pre WW2 - with a strategy of "appeasement for peace in our times", which ultimately lead to the costilies endeavor of all history or stand up!

Joe, Dallas, USA TX

Iran probably has enough radioactive material already to create dirty bombs capable of denying human access to most of the Middle Eastern oil fields for the next hundred years. Not that riding their horses to work should bother most Americans, they all think they're cowboys anyway.

What the Iranian President actually said was that he wanted Israel wiped off the map. I can show you millions of Catholic Irish living perfectgly normal lives who want Northern Ireland wiped off the map. It doesn't mean they want the Northern Irish slaughtered, it just means they want a political change.

Incidentally, is history taught in US schools? None of their ex-pupils seem to know that the only reason their forces were in Europe in WWII was because Hitler declared war on America. It was not the other way round.

Alan Burnham, Perth, Australia

Isn't it ironic? Only four countries have not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty - India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea. Yet it is Iran that is in the Bush Maladministration's crosshairs... Of those countries which are not signatories, three are close friends of the USA, and the fourth one has been dealt with through intense diplomacy, probably because it does have nuclear weapons. Iran, a signatory, is not doing and has not done anything it is not allowed to do as per the treaty, whereas the USA, also a signatory, has long broken it.

It has nothing to do with nuclear development, with nuclear weapons that Iran might want to develop or not, it is exclusively about grabbing Iran's rich oil fields which, for the most part, lie adjacent to southern Iraq. We have reached peak oil, and now demand exceeds the dwindling supply, and the USA wants most of the world's oil for itself and for its war machine in its Neocon wet-dream of conquest and dominion over the whole poor world.

Vierotchka, Geneva, Switzerland

Fail to comprehend why such enthusiasm in bringing down to feet whoever in the ME tries to acquire some hi-tech material that would match Israel's capabilities. I was surprised that the lion share of arms sale of USA( over US$62 billion in ME over the next few years alone), Russia, France, UK( sweet Euro fighter deal with Saudi Arabia-dumb on the kingdoms part as well,)etc are to the ME.Why.......

Conventional military confrontation other then India vs Pakis hardly exist in other part of the world. Without maintaining the quota status to Israel & maintaining or constantly refuelling the ME crisis there would be drop in arms sales & a subsequent loss in revenue & authority.

Israel has nuclear capabilities, the bottom line of all the hubbub seems maintaining its status quo & the American hegemony.

But for the Iraq invasion 1million people would have lived. Bush Cheney, Cohorts, overzealot patriots you need more blood well lets have a war on the American soil for a change.

Shafi, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Seeing as that the USA is among the most powerful nations in the world it is intrinsically natural for rogue nations with powerful leaders to use their unyielding, unchecked power to make decisions which aren't in the best interest of their civilians. Now with that said, some might argue it is not the USA's job to force it's views on sovereign nations. HOWEVER, when it is a matter of national security it becomes a matter of foreign policy. While it might seem we are playing "God" around the world, the US sole intention is to secure it's own national security. Now weather we should be going into countries for various philanthropic and political issues is debatable. On a moral basis, it seems like the right thing to do, but on a political basis it seems like the more we offer help the more resistance we face. I have always hoped for a peaceful international community, but that isn't reality, and sometimes we have to leave the comfort of the Atlantic and Pacific to do what's in our best.

ryan, Dallas,

In 2010 we will know what decisions were made and when and by whom. Right now we are all in the dark.

blake southwood, Auburn, USA/ California

How long does the USA think it can prevent nuclear weapons from being just another weapon in the arsenals of the worlds nations, whether friends or allies? And when, not if, will nuclear weapons be used in regional warfare? Twenty years, fifty; whenever it's just a matter of time. And are we to destroy each and every "evil" nation each and every time it approaches operational nuclear capability? Hardly desirable and not obtainable! So, let's worry about problems we can solve such as global warming, asteroid impacts, pandemic diseases and surviving the GWB administration.

Rocky Shoals, Fort payne, AL

What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Is there any REAL evidence Iran is building nuclear weapons? Is it now "okay" to sentence one to destruction first and ask questions later, like was done in Iraq? How WMD's did Iraq have when it was judged and sentenced for destruction? When was the last time Iran bombed a country? When was the last time Iran invaded a country? How many countries has the US attacked, invaded or occupied since 1950? Who is the only country in the world to have used nuclear weapons - and on civilian populations!!!? How many nukes does US have NOW? How many nukes does Israel have NOW? Is USA a CHRIST-ian nation? How many men were in Jesus' army - how many men did Jesus call to battle? Or, was Jesus that guy who said: "Drop your swords; for those who live by the sword will die by the sword", and then commanded: "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"? Do Bush and all his Christian followers attach love notes to all those bombs???

Brent, Locust Grove, US/GA

Mike,
Have an opinion about a subject before you reply to it. The subject is not wether or not we import oil from Iran. It is
easier to critique than it is to be critiqued, eh?

My view on the subject is simply this:
There needs to be a plan for war with Iran, as it is becoming more and more inevitable as time rolls on with no real effort on Iran's part to comply with the U.N. As far as a perfect plan, there is probally no such thing, but aiming at perfection in this matter sure is wise. There are lives at stake, on both sides, and the minimalization of all lives lost IS perfection to the U.S.

Sonja, Little Rock, AR

The USA already has 2 unfinished wars under its belt, and seems all too willing to start a 3rd one even though the president and congress is unwilling to start a military draft (bad for re-election you know...).
All this can be lain at the feet of the GOP neoconservatives, a group of essentially communists who have taken over the rightwing and twisted their party into that of a Soviet style paranoid idealogy. Their great thinkers/predecessors were Russian, and were big fans of Marx, Lenin and Trotsky. I find it astonishing that they have been able to market their brand of soviet-think successfully to the conservative right. Its the hoodwink of the century in my opinion.

Steve Savage, Tulsa, OK, USA

While the rest of the world bemoans evil, or excuses it away, we Americans will gladly fight and die for what is right. Better to die for something than live for nothing.

If you are too weak to do the right thing, at least get out of our way while we do the dirty work that is needed to be done.

Glad to see the "freedom-loving" Chinese are infiltrating Western forums like this with their good advice.

Wit, Los angeles, CA

i have very little to say to those that think that Iran is no danger to the world....i can only suggest they listen to the words spoken by the Iranian leaders, and then to watch their actions in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza, Afghanistan....

i would very much like to be wrong in my belief that the Iranian govt is dangerous to their neighbors....the last thing i want for the world is to be proven right.

dwenzel, dallas, texas, usa

Mike Hollins opines that the Iranians will not retaliate because it will be a(cake walk) for us as stipulated by one of our esteemed Generals. It is is obvious to any sane ,well read person that his Kennedy/Cuba example is quite irrelevant. Had President Kennedy bombed the Russians,they most adamantly would have retaliated.Think again America,and learn from the debacle in IraQ. ONLY SIMPLE MINDED,DELUDED EXTREMISTS ,like those who lead us into Iraq, are able to manufacture such rosy scenarios. As we are going all over the Islamic world bombing every thing in sight ,in self defence of course, it would be very foolish of us to even think that the Iranians have no plans to evade and then counter our bombardment , regardless of how heavy it is.

eric simon, LA, ca,usa

The nuke sites are going. Iran will have been warned. The first 'go around' will be to simply take out the nuke sites as promised -- no big suprise. Then it's up to the Iranian jihadist-terror-sponsoring government. Depending on the response we may then take down their entire military.

If we went into Iraq partially on the world-wide assumption that Saddam was developing WMD's, we for sure cannot let Israel handle this without our assistance.

Joe, Novi, MI

If they really want nuclear weapons so bad, then maybe we should airmail them one . . .

William, Texas, U.S.

You can't debate, discuss, negotiate or talk to people who want to string you along and yank your chain! Holding hands and singing Kum-Ba-Yah only works in Hollywood. We can't allow evil to persist. Study the "Just War Theory" and then get back to me.

Greg W., De Pere, WI. USA

Greg, De Pere, WI/USA

Iran is Hezbollah. Can we live with a nuclear Hezbollah? This will take terrorism to a level that no one can imagine.

Isreal just took out a big part of Syria's nuclear program. Did anyone have anything to say about it? No, because the world understands what's at risk. Iran is like a gangster bully that hangs around the school yard. Everyone tolerates his presence but secretly everyone hates that he's there.

If ever in the history of the world a military action would be necessary and justified, this would be it. Go project Checkmate.

John, Los Angeles,

My question to Ahmadinejad:

You say you'd like to lay a wreath at the site of the 9-11 attack to honor the victims.....I can't help notice that when you give a speech in your home country it not unusual for the crowd to chant: "Death to America !!".... "Death to America !!".... How can you one one hand honor the victims of 9-11 and on the other hand call for our demise?

Do we even agree on who the victims were?

Michael P, Manassas, VA

I hope Checkmate does a better job than the planners who handled Iraq. Their decision to eliminate all the infrasturctureof existing military and police backfired and mired us in a horrible quagmire. At least it is nice to know they are thinking about these things. I also hope there is someone on the team with a longer term vision for the region. Too often we seem focused on the perceived near-term benefit, letting that outweigh the longer term damage which ultimately is far worse.

CAP, ny, usa

I hope that we will not go to war with Iran, for it will force Iran's hand of acting out it's predicted consequences of continual terrorism against the western world for years to come. But, unless Iran comes t the realization of what it is doing by arming people that it will not be able to control in the future, I see no alternative but to strike first. Diplomacy counts, but, timing is everything in this rapidly moving situation. I would rather deal with the threat of terrorism than the threat of a nuclear weapons being used against us or our allies.

Michael G., Bangkok, Thailand

As an American it greatly disturbes me that many of our leaders and people want to go to war with everyone. We failed in Iraq, a place we shouldn't have gone in the first place; we failed in Afghanastan that really needed our help. We don't need to go after Iran; we need dialogue, to say the least America will fail if it invades Iran with an overstretched military.

Robert, Hartford, Connnecticut, USA

Check your calendar for a moonless night. Satlinks will go dead. Powerplant substations will be hit by cruise missiles C3 installations will blow up. Iranian patrol boats will vanish. Aircraft over their airspace will too. It's going to be right out of a Clancy novel. The worst part will be the 2.5 million barrels of oil that won't go to market each day.The price will settle out at about $150 a barrel. The west can afford that but China and India simply cannot. The mullahs will hold their population hostage as the amenities of modern life dry up. If the west doesn't act western cities will be vaporized. What a mess President Carter created!

torabora, susanville, california

Does Americans think they can control the world? That Israel is allowed to be the only one in the region with nuclear weapons? Why doesn't America encourage Israel to get out of the illegally occupied lands and to try and live in peace with its neighbours? Who tells America they have the only true God and that it is His will that they should police the world? Did someone die and come back to earth and tell America that they have this right? There are more educated people in the balance of the world than in America.

Yvonne Wackernagel, Woodville, Ontario, Canada

The reallity of it all is that Iran wants to destroy Israel and USA. We must defend ourselves. If someone on the street told you they wanted to kill you or your family, wouldnt you take action to protect and defend yourself.

Ike, parker, AZ

If Bush bombs Iran, he will cement his reputation as a war criminal even more solidly! Crazy idea. And, bombinb Iran won't eliminate the urge for nuclear weapons in the Middle East as long as Israel (and the U.S.) have them, and occasionally make blustery comments about using them (Bush's contemplation of using "tactical" battlefield nukes to bust bunkers).

Don Molde, Reno, Nevada

Every nuclear bomb has a mixture of isotopes that shows where and when that bomb was manufactured. The US knew a great deal about the Soviet military's facilities from the fallout of their nuclear tests.

Nobody can turn over a nuclear bomb to any other organization as a way of avoiding the consequences: simple analysis of the bomb's leftovers will reveal who is responsible.

Everyone knows this in the military world. The Iranians know this.

Why do you all think you have never heard of it?

Our governments are very good at propaganda. One propaganda technique is to make people afraid of an enemy. As the gov becomes more totalitarian, the enemies become internal. We are, in the western world, approaching the 'internal enemies' stage.

Lew Glendenning, Sunnyvale,, CA

The near-limitless ignorance and bloodthirstiness of many posters here are truly alarming; none of them seem capable of distinguishing between the brutally repressive Iranian regime and the Iranian people, who apparently aren't suffering enough and need to be nuked into "liberation." As for Iran working with Al-Qaeda, er hellooo -so an ultra-fundamentalist Shiaa regime will be uniting with an ultra-fundamentalist Sunni group, each of whom sees the other as an unpardonable evil that must be eradicated? Er, righty ho...
Attacking Iran is just what Ahmadinejad and Co. want - this is the ONLY way they'll get the whole nation behind them, as well as gain widespread support, at least initially, from across the majority-Sunni Middle East. It will also lead to counter attacks on Gulf nations and inflame sectarian tensions, very possibly leading to civil war across the region, dragging in other countries too. Bush, Cheney & Co are starting the countdown to WW3 - and some are cheering it on!

Ruth, Salwa , Kuwait

interesting comments. Everyone has believed that Iran is after nuclear weapons and that Iran is the cause of problems in Iraq. YOU ARE BEING FOOLED AGAIN.

1. So far, 3 years of intensive investigations by IAEA has confirmed nothing but Iran's claims that she is moving towards a peaceful nuclear program. Media always report only 1 sentence that the investigation is not yet complete: "IAEA is not yet able to confirm that all nuclear materials in Iran are accounted for". Read IAEA reports instead of politician's point of view.

2. Most of the current Iraqi government officials can speak fluent Farsi (Persian) because during Saddam's rule they lived in Iran. (current government & majority in Iraq are Shiite. Saddam was Sunni). Therefore, there couldn't be any other government that is friendlier to Iran; and Iran fully supports it. Number of US troops being killed by Sunni's is far more than those killed by Shiite's. So, "IRAN'S INVOLVEMENT IS A RED HERRING from the real QUAGMIRE in IRAQ"

Jack, Toronto, CANADA/ONTARIO

I am amazed and disheartened by the number of Americans in these comments who display their ignorance of history and their love of violence so freely. I wonder how many of the pro-bombing commenters are invested in government jobs, the military, or corporate interests who stand to benefit from an attack against Iran.

All of you U.S.-based warmongers: Look at the record of U.S. involvement in Iran's internal affairs and economy over the last 50 years. You will see, as clearly as writing on a chalkboard, that the United States has been the aggressor and instigator of violence against Iran, and not vice-versa. Go google. Read. Understand.

In a broad and lasting sense, the key to this and so many other dilemmas that are facing the United States and the world is: disarm heavily and radically, and in its place, perform the work that leads to cooperation and peace between nations. War -- its planning, its execution, and its aftermath -- is a huge, net drain on humanity.

Rob Conrad, Chicago, Illinois

From firing the Iraqi Army to allowing crooks and incompetents to ruin post war reconstruction efforts, there is no denying that Paul Bremmer will go down as one of the biggest bunglers in history—and so will his boss, George Bush. . . But—what would Iraq and the Middle East look like today if Saddam were still in power. Sanctions would have ended—and even though his WMDs were gone by the time the last war started there is little doubt that he would have rebuilt those programs funded with an immense amount of oil revenue. Would the 5 million Kurds in the north have survived the lifting of sanctions and the inevitable political resurrection of Saddam Hussein? There is no denying that Iraq is a bad situation today, but there are even worse scenarios along that other path that so many, in hind sight, say we should have taken. Is a nuclear armed religious theocracy that financially supports and openly praises groups that intentionally blow up restaurants full of civilians and school busses full of kids really what the world wants to live with? If so, then do nothing about Iran and it will happen?

Randy, Ventura, CA

Why not?
The red necks and armchair warriors in the United States are getting bored, and the hand wringers skin is so chaffed from the plight of the poor Iraquis, it is getting too expensive for the bottled watee they carry with them on peace marches that we in the states need a good program on our TV's to get our minds of of our ongoing dump into poverty.
I wonder if they will get rid of the Name "Shock and Awe" and find something with a bit more pizzaz for the Iranian theater.
Our Religous fundies have found out that Hell has more than enough room left within it and that we can send millions more into its confines and that Heaven itself is a waiting Christian warriors to enter its Fortress and has stocked shelves of the PX with crosses,good books, harps and wine
for them to enjoy.
The "The Land of Opportunity" is once more as anyone with Euros in their pockets can damn near buy a kingdom .
Poor foreigner?
Join Army and become an American with good pay, food as a bonus.

Michael. D. Chattick Sr., Olympia , Washington, USA

Will has lost his mind if he thinks French FM Koucher is one SANE head. Displomacy would not work with Hitler and it will not work with terrorists. Geez! Give me a break!

Mary Brown, Mission Viejo, USA/CA

Here we go again. Policy wonks with little front line military experience dictating how to exercise military power. Moreover, thinking they are smarter than field commanders and being influenced by an Isreali operative is not good policy for the United States. If Isreal wants to wage war on Iran let Isreal wage the war. It is not in the interests of the US and EU to have the straits to the Gulf blocked by Iran. The Swiss and the Irish economies have prospered by remaining neutral. Iran, like Iraq is not our fight. don't let the neocons and Dr. Kass beguile the US and UK into another military mistake.

kevin prongay, Los Angeles, CA, USA

All right US citizens, you're so big and bad with all your
talk about taking a shrinking military to fight IRAN. Pres. MA is headed for the United Nations and Columbia Univ. Arrest
him for terrorist acts and see where that gets us.

D. WInthrop, Chicago, IL

First, those who say the Iraq invasion wasn't successful should look at the numbers. Something like one fifth the manpower of the Gulf War and about ten times the amount of territory taken. Crudely put, we were about fifty times as effective.

As in any war, the Law of Unintended Consequences is at play and, in this one, there are multiple players intent on exploiting that idea ranging from Tehran to Pyongyang, not to leave out some political opportunists in other places such as Washington, DC.

Just wondering if there is a "back door" solution such as the one that replaced an earlier Iranian leader back in the fifties?
There are a lot of Iranians who would like to see some changes made that don't involve glowing in the dark.

Jerome C. Borden, Layton, USA/Utah

Insanity these people are looking for armageedon most of the airforce leadership is evangelical cultists and waiting for jesus's return and could careless about anyone but themselves and if Israel thinks these people care for them their delusional!

David, Tampa ,

Wow, I feel as if I am reading postings from brainwashed elementary zombies. Everyone is so quick to fly off the handle and start bashing bush and war, etc. Do me a favor and get out of your VW bus and open your bloodshot eyes. Nobody is saying we are going to war with Iran, instead we are planning and preparing for war with not only Iran, but several other countries. Would you rather the U.S. not be prepared for such an event? Should we wait until they have full nuclear capabilties before we interject?

Jeremy, iraq, iraq

Omar, Who the hell is "Saudia"? You need to learn better English before you conclude as to just exactly who is playing God here. Your statement lacks all coherence. If you ever get to the point where you understand the English language, perhaps you will be able to see the beauty of the US, and the principles that it stands for. This is a fight between good and evil, my friend. Evil needs to be sqashed, and soon!

JoeBob, Yukon, Il

I do hope they have thought through the aftermath this time. A couple of weeks on that subject will be enough to dissuade anyone from any war.

Colin c, Shrewsbury,

Don't bother setting a boot in Iran. "Shock and Awe" precisely on obviously military targets after taking out the anti-ship missiles along the shipping lanes and we can spar them all year long. We don't even have to truck over to another part of the world this time, since we already have a heavy presense there, and it will only serve to get the Iranians out of Iraq.

Of course, mounting sanctions amid years-long spectre of impending war can bankrupt them into being the old man of the middle east. And we can spar them economically for quite a long, long time, too.

The Iranians waiting to kick out the Ayatollahs can take over from there. Time is on our side. Go USA!

Ernie Oporto, Hillsborough, NJ

Iran-if the U.S doesn't do it I hope Israel will. Time to deal with the evils of Islamic terror, nuclear or otherwise and for the West to stop cringeing and wimpering. To delay Iran's nuke is better than doing nothing which is what most Western countries are best at. From the outset it was patently obvious to everyone except most politicians including "Condi the Catastrophe " that sanctions and negotiations would never work.

I.Kemp, Nahariya, Israel

it's unbelievable what we reads this days in the news, specially newspapers from USA.

democrats and republicans got outraged because of a iranian leader want to go to ground zero???? what about the good friends from pakistan, afheganistan, and the GOOD friend turkey.....?????????

maybe it's time for everybody listen what sibel edmonds and others are saying.

rj, portugal,

if you are serious about stability in Iraq you need to deal with Iran seriously. Iranian embassy in baghdad is the one who rules . there is no limit for Iran ambition. a nuclear weapon in Ali Khamanai and Ahmadi Najad hands mean a Cake walk to the golf. invasion of iraq was the big mistake Bush committed . hopefully this time he will get it right and get rid of the real danger in Iran.

yousif , newcastle, UK

John Stuart Mill said it best, "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

Marc Patti, Knoxville, TN

Doesn't Iran have the world's 2nd largest oil reserve? Aren't we running out of oil much faster than anyone anticipated now that China and India's economies are booming and thirsting for oil? It's pathetic that nobody these days can just call a spade a spade and politicians and journalists are forced to blow millions of hours of manpower garbling about "democracy" and "terrorism" when it's really about fossil fuel and overpopulation.

Randall, Philadelphia, US

We need to learn something about religious tolerance? Are you people stupid? Go to Tehran and stand up in public and say that you love Jesus and see what happens. Bushco might be inept but let's not fool ourselves into thinking that Iran is a benign regime.

CJ, Phoenix, AZ

Its nice to know *someone* is planning for the inevitable. In real life, if someone has threatened to kill you, only a very stupid person "waits" for it.

Chris, Bow, NH

If Iran (a major sponsor of Islamic terrorism) gets close to having a nuclear weapon it would be a gross abrogation of responsibility by our leaders to let them continue developing it to completion. Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea may have presented us with a fait accompli which we unfortunately have to live with, but if we can act in the case of Iran (whose nuclear ambitions are certainly not secret) then we certainly should.

Robbie, Cambridge, UK

The American military is against any attack on Iran for obvious reasons. An attack on Iran would send the world's economy into recession. The oil would be cut off through the strait, Saudi Arabian oil fields would be destroyed by the Shia in Saudi Arabia, not to mention the Perians in Europe and America and their reactions.

Col. North, L.A., USA

In all posts, substitute "Germany" for "Iran," and "FDR" for "Bush."

There really are moments in history when a line must be drawn, despite the hysteria from those who espouse peace... at any cost.

Inevitably, the resulting cost is unthinkably higher.

E.L. Merkel, Chicago, USA

Did this change anyone's mind on the problem? I thought not.

Dennis, Seattle, WA

Remember the old song, "I'd like to buy the world a Coke and live in harmony?"

Instead of making contingency plans, perhaps that's what we should do. Let's just send them lots of Coca Cola; that should solve the problem.

Not.

D, Potrerillos Arriba, Panama

That a government's military institutions plan for a nation's defense is absolutely legitimate. What is not legitimate is the concept of attacking yet another nation that has done NOTHING to us. What did Iraq do to us? What has Iran done to us? We overthrew Iran's government in the 50s....that WE did. But, what war or government overthrow have they done against us?

Let's be clear: we're the aggressors, and Iran is the victim in this. We should leave them alone and leave their people to overthrow the Islamic regime when they're good and ready. That is not our job

Jamie Foxer, Athol, MA

And Iran will use it's super top secret "Dust Storm Weapon" to win again, like they did at Desert one! "Aim High" but don't get any dust in your airplane's engines or missiles engines!

Jaye, Newark, NJ USA

what about Oct. 12th? Is anyone concerned?

Kay edwards, norcross, usa

Yes, and the "Bush regime" has kept us at war easily for the last sixty years *sad laugh*...this is not about one name, or one man, or even one family. Limited wars for profits and influence have been the standard the US has quietly perpetuated for a LONG time now. It's time to stop the violence.

J.T. Scott, Conway, Arkansas (USA)

Maybe we will bring out the light show this time around and have fun with the directed energy weaponry. Bullets and bombs are sooo passe.

John, Redding, California

Here in the U.S., we say we live in a democracy, or at least a representative republic. What concerns me, is we are so often misinformed, or much more often, simply uninformed by our media and government. Add to that all the simleminded, harebrained comments I see on here, and I see how we have more of a trusteeship, which is mostly for the benefit of a few, while the rest of us are in a "confidence game", whereby each party and candidate sees who can pull it off the best. Democracy here would be more mob rule, and we can't really have that now, can we? The people here are not ready for it, much less in Iraq. That's why the founding fathers started the Electoral College. We can't let the rest of the riff raff actually vote directly for a president.....
The perception is the reality.

DJ Voss, Missouri, USA

I agree with Elie Mansour, perhaps we should understand others cultures, be bipartisan and further diplomatic efforts. War will only bring death, financial toll, and more controversy to the United States.

Joshua M, miami, Fl, USA

This is NEWS? Knee-jerk anti-American anti-Bush more like.. How could the U.S. NOT be preparing itself, against a maniac state/leader which can't wait to a blast Israel off the map, then have a go at the US? Can you imagine the screeches from the servile media if Iran made a strike and it were discovered that there was no US counterr strategy in place? You insult my intekkigence.

Rick Gall, Ottawa, cANADA

Hey Sam from Dallas. According to your thinking, your beloved Slick Willy left us: bin Laden, a very pompous and aggressive Saddam, and North Korea. Here is a quote from 'Genocide: a critical bibliography review' that sums up good ol' Bill's foreign policy. "The unwillingness to stop genocide in the 1990's was one of the most shameful episodes of international leadership failures in the 20th century." Rwanda and the Balkans mean anything to ya Sam?

Jefe, Honolulu, HI

We struggle with war because we are governed largely by pansies that are too afraid of the political consequences to use the full might of the USA military. We could have these countries shaking in their smoldering boots if we were not afraid to fight.

Sad state of affairs.

Communists and Socialists are tearing the USA apart from the inside. That has been their war plan since the 1950's.

born in november, York/PA, USA

When is the US public going to wake up to the fact that the US conducts wars in the Middle East for two reasons - energy and the Israeli lobby?

Malcolm Ward, Dubai, UAE

We can either learn from history or we can suffer the consequences. With the advantage of a rear view mirror, we can see the warning signs of Hitler. Iran is much more provoking than Hitler was at this stage AND is pursuing a nuclear bomb. We need to use the MOMB and other conventional weapons (for now) to take out EVERY military, and nuclear site as well as their refinery. Once we do that, economics will take over and their people will demand a change in policy. The clerics, not wanting to lose power will accede.

bobnunny, Sunrise, Fl

Iraq was not a threat. Iran simply talks as the Russians did during the cold war. Are decision makers really so foolish as to start yet another, unneeded war?

Farrukh, Woking, UK

Tell the Kurds or Kuwait' Iraq isn't a threat, Saddam had his site on Saudi Arabia eventually. By 2002 Saddam was ranked as the 5th richest person in the world. His intentions were to pick up where had left off as soon as the sanctions were lifted. which is what France Germany and Russia were pushing for. Iran isn't Russia, your dreaming. Iran's Mullahs are crazy, driven by a diabolical vision of the future which they think they can control by causing a nuclear holocaust. They have said so don't you read?

John W, Fort Worth, Texas USA

THE United States Air Force has set up a highly confidential strategic planning group. So confidential is this group, that only the US government and readers of The Sunday Times are allowed to know about it.

David Masu, Zürich,

If we let Iran build a nuclear bomb, some morning we will turn on the TV and see something that will make the World Trade Center look like a Sunday School Picnic. If the American people don't have the balls to defend their freedom, then they are going to loose it, deservedly so. A majority of the people in this country have more concern whether Britteny Spears is wearing underware , than if their children are going to be vaporized in a nuclear explosion. My only sympathy is for the children of this country, who had not hand in this insanity.

Edward Boothe, Brownsville, TX

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I'm appalled at how uninformed so many are in this forum. You people all need to read a lot more newspapers, particularly the three Israeli ones that have English editions.

Arik Silverman, MIlwaukee, Usa

The leftists will never blame Ahmadinejad when he gets what he has been begging for. They never acknowledged Saddam's crimes and that he demanded to be overthrown. They are the descendants of the idiots who defended Hitler.

George, Kent,

Iran does not even have reliable nuclear power yet, let alone a bomb.The Americans are so full of it. I would like to remind everyone that Iran has never used NUCLEAR WEAPONs against anyone. The United States has used nuclear weapons twice before. on human beings, mostly civilians. Sure sounds like the Brits are worriied about the wrong country.

Robert Van den Broeck, Kouchibouguac, Canada/New Brunswick

While so many are so hot on "nuke em till they glow," nobody has taken into consideration the global air circulation aspect. I'm not talking global warming, so don't hand me any huhu about that. What I'm saying is a grouping of high yield surface bursts will entrain tons of radioactive particles into the global circulation that will be spread all over the world, including the United States. That little cloud from Chernobyl Europe was sweating out would be nothing compared to what our government is prepared to do to Iran. The particles that are small enough will become condensation nuclei creating precipitation in the form of rain or snow, wreaking havoc in the form of radioactive deposition. You won't be able to drink the water and plants won't do very well. Everybody is only concerned with the political aspects, but it's the physical world problems that will come back to bite us on the ass. Quite a few cancers may be a result of the 2 we dropped on Japan & other nuke tests.

Dave Kisor, Riverside, CA

I see a lot of loose hormone-driven talk here - and not just in the letters column - discussing war with Iran as though we were talking about a barroom fight. Some write about using nuclear weapons as though they were just bigger bombs.

Folks, this is insanity, and you all need to snap out of it! US plans for victory over Iran are almost certainly based on miscalculations. Victory would require occupying and "pacifying" Iran, which is almost certainly beyond the US's capability. The human cost would be horrific; this would rank among the greatest criminal acts in history.

As for using nuclear weapons, this is a simply terrible idea, and not nearly enough is being said about that. A "tactical" nuclear strike is an oxymoron; "collateral damage" would be huge and would extend across borders. Worse, the anti-proliferation treaty would be destroyed. The message to the world would be: "these are normal weapons of war and no country is truly sovereign unless they possess them."

Chris Horton, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA

War with the Iranian government has been a long time coming. I do not relish the though of more war in the region, but we can not and must not tolerate regimes that limit our God given right of Freedom, no matter who or where they are.

A caveat to any future war is that the motive must be right, just and pure, both to the planner's and executioner's moral compasses, and also in the sight of God. It is okay to do the right thing, however one must be aware that one day you will stand before God for judgment.

Having said that, I ask that God (in Jesus Holy Name) bless all who are in harms way today, with a special blessing on the Nation of Israel and particularly on our Warriors (Aus/US/UK) in the field.

Iain, ScalesOff Eyes, Planet Earth

For those who want war, sell your homes and leave for the front lines. Otherwise, shut your mouths and let others live in peace.

At least the Prophet Mohammed and even early American presidents went into battle because they believed in what they were fighting for and were willing to die defending it. The rest are cowards and opportunists.

Ray, Dearborn, MI

How come the Americans can start a war whenever they like with a country that hasnt done any harm to them. Where would we stand one day if every country would start a war on the basis of their national interest. Whats the use of having an organisation called the United Nations. God bless the human race.

A.Sanjrani, Boston, UK

I believe that the world has had enough experience with terrorist States to be aware that you must treat them from a position of strength. Hitler had to be defeated and the same goes for the newest fascist from Iran. At the same time, the potential alliance of Chavez and "southern friends", North Korea etc with Iran must be taken into account. How much nuclear tecnology are they sharing? What are their pretentions? France, Great Britain and the USA should not wait for the results, but act accordingly.
William V. Masterson Jr., Córdoba (Spain)

william V. Masterson Jr, Córdoba, Spain

Given that the USA and Israel recently vetoed a UN resolution proposing that the middle east become a non-nuclear zone, how can these two countries justify attacking Iran to prevent it aquiring nuclear energy? The hipocrisy is beyond belief.

david, NYC, USA

Neither Iraq nor Iran has attacked or threatened to attack the US. What right does the US have to attack anyone that has not attacked the US?

So who invaded more countries in the last 60 years-Iran or the US? Has Iran invaded anybody in the last 200-400 years? Which country is the real danger to world peace.

So how many countries did Hitler pre-emptively invade before the world finally united to destroy him?

Fortunately only about 25% of the most ignorant Americans still support Bush. No matter how disasterous and immoral an attack on Iran, one small benefit would be the political destruction of Bush and the Republican party for at least a generation.

Grey Starnes, New Orleans , La

Not much of a secret now is it?

Philippe, Coventry, Uk

if the are that good, why did,nt they get saddam in the first Gulf war, i balme bush senior for a lot.
jim Ireland.

jim, donegal, ireland

Iran Threatens Argentina because of the bombing of the Argentine Jewish Mutual Association, Farhadi arrested in Sulaimaniyah, Bombing of Marines in Beruit, American hostages, supplying roadside bombs to the Taliban and they treat women so well in IRAN ...... Why wouldn't one think that Iran wants only Peace.

Richard, San Francisco,

A nuclear-armed Iran is not a threat to the U.S.. While Iran possessing nuclear weapons isn't the preferred situation, it also is in no way comparable to say, al Qaeda possessing nuclear weapons.

Deterrence: Iran is not irrational and is well aware that a first strike against the U.S., whether carried out by Hezbollah or the IRGC, would earn a calamitous response from the U.S. The threat only arises if we attack them first.

As for Israel, when did it become part of the U.S.? Just because a nuclear Iran is allegedly (and I stress that word) a threat to Israel doesn't mean it is also a threat to the U.S. One must separate President Ahmadinejad's histrionic claims (e.g., destroying Israel) from his realistic statements.

The hyping of the "alleged" Iranian and Syrian threats has become truly alarming given how exaggerated, disingenuous, and often deceptive it is. What's more disturbing is that the American public is falling for it, just like Iraq, hook-line-and-sinker.

JB, Somewhere, USA

what if the air strike fail,during the israel-hezbollah war,both israel and the neo- con actually belleive that hezbollah can be destroyed simple by massive air strike along prove to be a failure.
the reality is that iran nuclear program do not post threat to the US, on the contrary, the real threat is that If iran goes nuclear, other countries such as saude arabia,egypt,jordan and other sorrounding countries will most likely try to obtain nuclear weapon.this make nuclear conflict,and nuclear terrorism more likely to occur.

jerry, Valenzuela, Philippine

As an Iranian I wish to see a moderate and democrat regime in Iran and we are fighting for it for years, jail, torture, etc didn't stop us.
But look at Iraq war, 700,000 casualties, millions of refugees, millions of displaced people in the country, destruction, more than 3000 casualty for American troops, billions of dollars.
In the other hand Iraq war produced hatred worldwide.
What do you think are consequences of war agianst Iran?

A, Belgrad,

Iran is the host to the world's new Hitler, the run up to confrontation is the same as it was in 1936.

Domestic democrats always push to placate bad people - why is Europe collectively ignoring the threat? Genocide breaks out in Europe about every 33 years - yet they allow history to repeat over and over again... My point is that Iran wouldn't be a threat if the world pressured with one clear voice. But if we're going to be a big dysfunctional family then it's going to be up to mean old Uncle Sam to clean up the mess.

"Support Our Troops - Bring the Democrats Home in 2008"

Jon, Albuqueruque, USA / New Mexico

The world powers, Americans in particular, are locked into this decaying orbit that indicates the only way to deal with peoples with whom you disagree is to threaten them. If they do not capitulate to the threats then the next step is to attack them using the various methods outlined in the article. Like all objects in a decaying orbit, they eventually crash and burn. The problem is that there may not be much of mankind left by the time Bush and his like-minded cronies have run their course.

Ken, Valdagno, Italy

You're right Bill. And God Bless our Air Force and every other member of our military!

Mary Brown, Mission Viejo, USA/CA

I remember when the USA was the most respected, copied,envied,nation on Earth.
Since Bush was elected it seems to have become the worlds biggest lunatic asylum. Why ?, and more importantly why is the UK government not pointing this out.
The world is heading to hell on a handcart, Stop it now while there is still time.

Ned Kelly, Perth, Australia

There are tyrants in the world who we must not allow to grow in military power. Ahmadinejad has explicitly threatend the State of Israel. To argue that that Iran "simply talks" when we have proof of their nuclear program is simply nonsense. Pretending there is no threat is not a policy I want my President to follow. It is entirely reasonable to plan for a military strike if diplomacy fails. Failure of diplomacy is a distinct possibility.

Martin Harry, Austin, Texas

Waging a war on Iran would mean taking anti-Americanism to unprecedented levels and paving the way for the development of a new breed of terrorists outnumbering those of the recent previous generations. Besides that, steps should start being taken to assure the world that nobody, including the US administration and its allies, wants to have anything to do with nuclear weapons.

Roberto Ruggiu, Roma, Italy

i think its great that the air force is planning ahead. better to have a contingency plan than get caught sitting on our butts with no idea on how to fight back

michael, flower mound, texas

The only way to secure peace is to prepare for war.

Jason, Columbus, OH

As usual, who else is going to take care of the problems of world like Iran, the UN, please. The UK, most of them can't even manage a toothbrush. Russia, China, again, please. So, once again, the US has to do the heavy lifting while everyone else cries about why something needs to be lifted in the first place. Feel free to bash Bush and the US Military all you want, neither one of them is going to change based on your opinion or ignorance of the necessity of eliminating a world wide threat.

John, San Antonio, Texas

I find this article most intresting. Daily, I read the NY Times,Los Angeles Times,Wall Street Journal and Washington Post ,and have not seen one article relating to
this subject.
If by chance this issue accelerated,there would be massive
riots / demonstrations in every town and city,and on every
college / university campus in the United States.
Sixty three percent of Americans are against the Iraq war.
Health Care is becoming the prime issue in the upcoming
presidential election.

Joe L., Columbia, Maryland , U.S.A

Now, weakened in both Afghanistan and Iraq, the Bush administration seems unwilling to negotiate. But, notwithstanding Ahmadinejad's inflammatory remarks, which BTW have gained him great respect in the Muslim world for standing up to the US, negotiations are preferable to war.
And note positive signs from Iran:

"In June 2006, Ayatollah Khamenei issued an official declaration stating that Iran agrees with the Arab countries on the issue of Palestine, meaning that it accepts the 2002 Arab League call for full normalization of relations with Israel in a two-state settlement" http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14462.htm

It is perhaps remarkable that Iranian TV has been showing (since May) a weekly series based on the true story of an Iranian diplomat in Paris who helped Jews escape the Holocaust.”
Note that Ayatollah Khamenei is not only head of the armed forces and the judiciary but also the national broadcast authority.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20808260/

Ken V., California, USA

Good.

Bracey Ayres, Preston,

Good for you, Joe! I'm sick and tired of all these libs beating up the military for doing their jobs! You're exactly right, of course. Since when is defending ones self wrong? Shall we sit and wait for them to finish up the bombs and then send them here with terrorists?? I mean, come on!

Don McCoy, Rochester, NY

Secret from the American people. Why is it that our own news agencies here in America is passifying this current administration so much? Why is it that our own media is filtering so much, that the rest of the people have no idea of what is going on with in this government? Maybe we're too afraid we'll get tasered. I don't know what the answer is. Anyways, thats just my 2cents.

Peace

ben, phoenix, arizona

The Bush administration has caused the tension in Iran, wanting another war like in Iraq, and has done everything to make it happen.

mart, Wilmington, de.

and who's team is saying this stuff about iran? isn't it the same as who lied about iraq?

karl roenfanz ( rosey ), evansville, ind. , united states of america

Surely you mean "not-so-secret" plan...

M. Hoeber, MIami, Florida, USA

It's funny how the MSM is always breathless when they report such a story; like they're shocked that our military would plan for such a thing. I would consider our military officers derelict in their duty if they DIDN'T perform such planning. Heck, we have plans for invading MEXICO if it ever came to that sitting on a shelf somewhere.

Joe Solis, Santa Paula, California

Perhaps it's merely a coincidence, since we speak of an operation aimed at Iran (Persia), but the term "checkmate" is derived from the Persian "shah mat," which translates roughly to "The King is defeated"...

Robert, Sacramento, CA

I would be extremely disappointed if the military didn't have plans to strike any nation. Part of preparedness is the plans for action. There wer plans that had to be fleshed out during the Cuban crisis and were.

Dave, St Paul, MN

If the US attacks Iran.... S'long The Dollar, S'long plasma TV's,
S'long air conditioned Macmansions and S'long Ford F150 pick-up trucks.

sid, NYC, USA

Well, bully days are gone. I think war option will be a bigger grinding halt for the US. I believe “clever”, “top” American politicians should find a better way to deal with Iran. Sanction and military have not worked so far. I don’t know when cowboys want to learn there are other ways apart from American way!

Steve , London, UK

In 1979, Chirac, then prime minister, supplies his friend Saddam with a nuclear reactor, Osirak, and iraki physicists are trained in France, at the CEA (Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique).
In 1981,Begin orders the IAF to destroy Osirak. The operation is carried out with success by the israelis, and receives worldwide condemnation.
In retrospect, preventing the dictator from building the bomb was the right thing to do, considering the use he made of WMD's against his own people.

Gilbert, Paris, France

Project Checkmate has one goal only. To ensure Iran does not develop nuclear weapons. The enrichment question is now a dead horse. Correct.

Zuzana , Bratislava,

From an outsiders perspective in sunny Australia - this all seems nuts! The American govt. and the military seem inseparable - it's a military country that invades countries for profit. What's the deal with American and Israel - it seems one can't be discussed without the other?
I encourage the rest of the world to visit Australia for a holiday, some sunshine, peaceful loving people and just chill out. The Iraiain men and woment love their children too - why try to kill them for a few bucks at the gas station? Are Americans really that shallow? Like I said, from an outsiders perspective, this is what it appears like - like it or lump it.

Peter Wilson, Canberra, Australia

Alireza-get it straight. Iranians have been captured in Iraq. They supply material for IED's. They are planning to build and USE nuclear weapons. (If they aren't, why was the prgram secret for so long?).

But also understand this. Our beef is not with the Iranian people, but only with the government. If there was an uprising and true democracy came from it, Itran would have nothing to worry about from the US or Israel.

mghirsch, Niles, IL, USA

Yes I do beleive tha the United Nations is a failure just as when Sadam Hussein was in power and now in the case of Iran...Russia and China were not a player...

roberto, los angeles, usa

The U.S. Military DOESN't make policy. The U.S. is not a bananna republic. The military, a volunteer military, only obeys the orders of those in command authority, namely the CINC (President).
I often wonder what pacifists consider worth fight for. I suspect many are old Hippies who have never realized the "ideas of the 60's" like communism just don't work in the real world.

Max Clark, Beavercreek, Ohio

Simon of Berkeley, please translate in your words what the
president of Iran really said...and how we have been mislead
so often by the Western media on the real meaning of the
words of Ahmadinejad....make sure you listen to his upcoming
United Nations and Columbia University speeches...
I am sure he will be misquoted thru translation again again

Rick, Solana Beach, USA

Let's see..I'm reading a bunch of bleeding heart liberals, who live free on the backs of US soldiers. The opinion of a coward is of no consiquence to a patriot and soldier!
and who will I vote for next year...the person who will seal our southern border and stop the invasion. Anyone who thinks Mexico is our friend should look at history: who did Mexico side with in World War I: the Axis; who did Mexico side with in WWII: the Axis; who did mexico side with in the Cold War: the Soviet Union. Who is Mexico siding with now? The drug cartels...by Mexico's own document's over 50% of the =ir Gross Nation Product comes directy or indirectly from the illegal drug trade.
And it there are mis-spellings on this, well, I'm writing on a lap top in Afghanistan with real men, now liberal cowards...
Dave in Afghanistan, and 6th generation Texan.

Dave, San Angelo, Texas

It's rather sad that so many who love the freedoms that the US Constitution offers do not have it within themselves to hate those powers who would take away their freedom.

George Orwell pointed out--in 1945--that "pacifists" always pointed to US and UK flaws and never criticized the USSR.

We found out later that the USSR funded the "No Nukes" and "Unilateral Disarmament" movements of the 1980s.

You don't need to believe me--these are easy to look up in Wiki and elsewhere.

Inviting the Iranian leader to Columbia U to speak--in view of the prohibition of dissenting voices in Iran--gives credence to the belief that the Left supports anyone who hates the American Way of Life. The recent statement that they would have invited Hitler to speak before he invaded Poland (Sept. 1939) is supposed to show tolerance; but hides their acceptance of Dachau (started in 1933).

DOD teams are plan for everything. We had plans for nuking the USSR. Were they used? No. Will Hillary attack Iran?

jtb-in-texas, Dallas,

Simon Hughs, Berkeley = Useful Tool for the Religion of Peace®

Eddie George, Cleveland , Ohio

Just follow the money. Blackwater, Raytheon, GE, Lockheed Martin, etc are making money. 2 million+ Iraqis have been killed since the USA started bombing in 1991. The United States will continue to wage wars to enrich corporations until the people bring this government down. It's time to save the people and rid the planet of this fascist government.

The USA should pay reparations to Iran. Remember the CIA coup in 1953. Remember the Iranian civilian airliner that the US shot down. Reparations for Iran !!!

Rosemarie Jackowski, Bennington, Vermont

Project checkmate? Is that some sort of joke. George Bush is not man enough to attack Iran. The US public have been brainwashed into even contemplating this - especially after the FAILED debacle in Iraq.

Alfonso Parelli, London, Uk

"The air force may be awake , but they did not shoot down any of the four big planes on 9/11!"

lyn, St. Louis, usa mo

That's the most stupid thing I think I've ever heard.

tf, Temple City, CA

i have little to say to those who choose to believe that the govt of Iran is no threat to the world....i can only suggest they listen to the words spoken by Iran, and watch their actions in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Gaza, Lebanon....

i hope to be proven wrong, my worst fear for the world is that i am right.

dana wenzel, dallas, texas, usa

Iraq is not going well, granted. But the US is occupying Iraq, if it comes to blows in Iran, the US will not occupy Iran, just carry out a large scale series of strikes against military targets (often planted in civilian areas by the Iranians for civilian "Human Shields"). The Iranians won't pose much of a threat to the Western Coalition Air Force (Sounds as though France may be on board). The Israelis proved those hyped Russian anti-aircraft systems can be overcome.

Greg, Seattle, USA

All thou Iran may be a threat the question is what to do? War is NOT cheap. My country is speanding millions of dollars on Iraq when in the beginning President Bush said we would not be doing Nation building. Hmmm, here we are nation building and in the middle of two groups out to kill us and each other. Do we really want to embroil ourselves in Iran? If we strike then do we go in and spend millions in government contracts building what we destroyed? This is insane and financially irrespondsible. The threat lies back in Afganistan with the Taliban. Return to the roots of where it all started and eliminate the threat. Find Bin Laden and eliminate him.

Bill, Palm Bay, Florida, USA

It's funny how these "highly confidential" plans always end up in the media.

Jay, Spring, TX

"Then consider negotiation, education, consultation, understanding, religious tolerance, and what kind of world that would lead to."

Those are rational thoughts begotten of a rational people. With the Islamists, there is no such thought. Their way of thinking is not the way of postmodern Western thought. They think as the ancients- there is no internalization of such things.
Their focus is entirely external. For example, if you or I were to
cause damage to a neighbor's fence, we might feel guilt or remorse, or wonder how I could have prevented the accident.
The Islamists in the Middle East would not have such internal thought. They do not contemplate internally. Their focus is entirely external. To try and put those of another culture in the realm of our own and expect the same processes of thought to occur is extremely naive and short-sighted. Indeed, our own government has been extremely foolish to propose democracy for Iraq and other Arab states.

Dave Kreitzer, Pitchin, Ohio

Alireza, not all of us think as some of these fervent posters. I have had the fortune of meeting many Iranians and find them to be wonderful people. But I also feel that your current government does not represent you and has been artificially trying to impose certain 'moral' values on your populace that do not fit them. Also, to hear some speak of even considering using pre-emptive nuclear strike to prevent the development of a nuclear device is just so shocking, horrifying, and morally hollow. Pandora's box indeed. I wish most Americans would stop being brainwashed and realize that the Iranian people are not their enemies but their natural allies. A small cadre of old-men does not make up a whole society. Americans should know that after being represented by Bush and his team.

Ian, Shanghai, China

Guilty of being pro-active? OK, let's just wait a few more months or years...Then we can be re-active. Then us poor Americans can be handed tissues from the other protected western countries as we finally destroy the Iranian military and hopefully their next Iatola picnic. Would that be honest? Hardly!

Government may attract the less than competent, but America and friends have a responsibility too. It will be sloppy, and will be revenge. But it wont be Russian style, with mass civilian casualties.

Your grandkids will, hopefully, thank us.

Kevin Neil, Hyde Park, USA, Florida

I agree with many that if Iran joins the "nuclear WMD club" it will in reality be a perfunctory effort by Iran, prompted by a cabal of international elitists greedy enough to engage in warmongering and rabble-rousing that is outrageous. True, the spector of hotheads being given--or taking--WMDs from soverign states could, because of bankrupt policies still promoted by certain nations, prompt a jittery group of international elites to start, in effect, WW3, with or without unconventional assets. Currently, domestic politics in several nations make any "loose cannon's" use of WMDs, or such, fodder for warmongers, and the international "military-industrial complex" that some seem content to accept. Ike was right about all of that. What the world needs now is for statesmen to begin to curtail politicians from recklessly willing to begin WW3 if a terrorist cell lights the fuse. Currently, I don't think the USA has in office the calibre of leadership that might offer much to the world.

Dave McLallen, Birmingham, Alabama

Ricky, Asheville,
We do not import oil from Iran. Get your facts straight before you make a post.

Mike Brown, Pasadena, Md.

Hey Michael D,

Hitler wasn't a threat to anyone either!

Stephen, Tacoma, WA

Americans believe what their government tells them. US policy in ME is shaped by Israel's policy and anyone who denies that does not know the truth and needs to do some research. So, you create enemies where enemies do not exist. Iraq is a prime example. they did not do 911. Iran is no threat to US but it does threaten Israeli dominance in ME. You are convinced that Iran is your enemy and your military has identified 1200 sites in Iran for bombing. Are you crazy or what. Think of civilian damage that this will cause and think of repercussions. It seems like you love to create enemies and the only way you can solve conflict is through bombing. In short that is American policy in ME, run by Zionists. Dominance. Google for PNAC, AIPAC ADL, AE. And American interference in Middle East.

Ahmed Asgher, manama, Bahrain

Opponents of U.S. military action against Iran often raise the specter of retaliation to justify their opposition. But it is a mistake to assume retaliation, through terrorism or otherwise, is inevitable.

Recall that the USSR did not retaliate in 1962 when the U.S. blockaded Cuba. When he announced the blockade, Kennedy emphasized it was a first step. And by moving 1,000 aircraft and 100,000 troops within striking distance of Cuba, the U.S. had made bombing or even invasion threats Khrushchev could not afford to ignore.

Now, General McInerny's estimate--which no other experts dispute--is that the U.S. could destroy Iran's navy, its offensive missiles, and its air defenses in a very large 3-4 day air campaign. Iran would then be helpless to prevent the destruction of anything the U.S. chose to target, starting with its nuclear facilities.

Only madmen would provoke a U.S. that had just disarmed them, and the theocrats have shown before that they fear an aroused U.S.

Mike Hollins, L.A., Calif., USA

I'm sure the President feels he has no choice but to attack the Iranian nuclear facilities. Better to NOT risk a nuclear weapon going off in an American city 10-15 years in the future. His poll ratings are irrelevant when it comes to the possibility of 100,000 dead Americans, don't you think?

Dale Broadhead, Apple Valley, USA/Mn.

Hitler thought invading Russia was a good idea & he used a
preemptive strike to weaken Russia. This looks like this will be Bush'-Cheney's very similar stupid mistake if they should order an attack on Iran. Iran has many very powerful allies. (We cannot even handle Iraq successfully.)
Which of you war hawks is willing to take up arms & lead your sons & daughters ect. into this 100 year long meat grinder?

Bob Franklin, Anutt, MO

Sounds like the planning group the Adolf Hitler had .... just before he invaded Poland.

John Harris, St. Petersburg, FL

Any attack on Iran would be utter madness. Any Government palnning this be it Us, French, British or other would essentialy be war mongering murderers grredily trying to control middle eastern oil resources. Thank goodness we will shortly have more global balance when Russia start building up their war arsenal again to stop madmen like Bush, Blair and now including the french president from vying to start a 3rd world war. Iran is no threat to anyone.

Michael, london, England

Why if USA goes to war, it is legal. Why if USA is using Nuclear in nagasakee, heroshema, bikkini and other places, it is ok.

double standards are the reason that there is no peacefull balance in this world. Why if the sole user of Nuclear weapon is not abondaning it but asking others to stop.

This is democratic justice ??? If it is.

So I am forced to say, long life democracy. Long life peace.

Let be it like that. But ask ourselves, don't insult democracy, because it is noble and for humans.

Don't let your guns kills innocents because otherwise you are also on the wrong side.

It takes millions efforts to be innocent and it takes only one bad bullet to be a criminal.

Peace

N. Khan, Karachi, Pakistan

If Iran is attacked I hope that America and Israel don't use WMD's or mini nukes as this would surely cause an escalation of any conflict in the region. The firewall between conventional and non-conventional weapons must be maintained ,especially regarding the pentagon's philosophy of using mini nukes in battle, as if it's part of the normal toolbox. Nukes are not a part of the normal toolbox and should be treated as a last resort. Personally I'd rather see the world with less nukes on both sides. Each side still has too many. WMD's will make things worse, therefore surgical strikes involving conventional weapons would cause less political harm. We've got to balance things out carefully. Personally I'd rather they abandon the idea of preemptive strike philosophy as this philosophy is causing ever greater tensions worldwide. I hope for peace as the consequences of war could be ww3.

Orion, Cardiff, Wales

You're quoting Ghostbusters in your analysis of a proposed massive escalation in hostilities between the USA and another soveriegn Arab nation? Ghostbusters?!?! Well thank you so much for your intelligent, thoughtful input. Perhaps you'd like to throw in a few words from Ace Ventura, Pet Detective as you dissect the complex political situation in Burma? Maybe Ferris Bueller has an insight that could heal the wounds between Russian and Chechyna? I don't know, maybe the hundreds of millions of people who will be forced from their land by climate change over the next century, and who might have an arguable moral case to beg a home from the nations whose pollution caused their crisis - maybe those people could find comfort in the words of, hmmm, Han Solo? Here's an idea - why don't you go and read some books and pop back when you've got the faintest idea what you're on about. Cheers.

Jeremy Smith, London, UK

Who ya gonna call?

Mel, Chicago, USA

Well certainly not you Yankees. You got kicked around in Vietnam, you are getting kicked around in Iraq, and now you want another kicking from Iran. Christians sure do love that suffering for Jaysus, eh?

Maybe we should call Ghostbusters to go looking for spooks in caves, instead?

Alan, Milton Keynes, England

A military response to Iran's imams is long overdue. I hope that Iran's collapse comes from within but, if not, we must topple them so decent Iranian people can take their country back.

Clark Baker, Los Angeles, CA

iran is not the problem israel and the us are the iranians are a bunch of boyscouts compared to the terrorist regimes residing in washington and tel aviv

darryl, Athens, georgia

sorry if my comments seem harsh but im not a fool i do know the facts very well and i dont suffer from that dangerous virus politicallus correctimus which causes sudden blindness and a need to criticise apparently bad things in an attempt to feel good about oneself and elevate oneself to some high level of judgemental purity. some doctors believe it comes from fear and the "if you cant beat them join them "complex..or the" lets jump on the band wagon everybody else did" philosophy. which is also the fear of standing up for what is right even if you are alone..which takes guts..how many of you watch or pretend not to see a woman being raped or a black man been beaten up on the london underground but dont get involved but on the same note love to express youselves in that politically correct light joining the crowd feeling safe in numbers afraid to stand up and say the truth because its just not very popular.

frabs, vienna,

We should further diplomatic efforts. War will only bring about death and a huge financial toll on many countries.

Joshua M, mimi, Fl, USA

I sit & watch the Iranian military percession "goose step" their way through the streets of Tehran & am braught back to a time just prior to the US entering WWII. We waited while the rest of world was a flame with conventional weapons. As a former Naval Aviator believe that our involvement is a necessary evil to prevent a world that is contaminated with radioactivity. Both sides of the political aisle beat on their chest on almost every bill proposed as "it's for the children" while pet projects are addded to these bills that do not even begin to touch those same children. If you want a world in which children can't go outside & play because of radioactive sickness then set on the side while the world burns if not let's wipe these facilities off the map & negociate terms to disarming the fanactics countries.

mike, Nashville, Tennessee

The so-called war against Iran will not be a war but a genocide, just as the Iraqi war has been a genocide with over a million Iraqis killed. I find it unbelievable that the Holocaust has itself become the major excuse for this crime. It is like the Nazis re-incarnated with the perfect excuse and the perfect military to continue to commit the crimes they started 70 years ago. How can the world stop this catastrophe?

Roger Lafontaine, Youngstown, OH

Excellent comments Susan.

For the US it's all about controlling the oil supplies not about fear of Iran launching attacks agains the US or Europe.

Now with Russia rebuilding its forces at least we may have a better balance in world military power which may help to stop aggresive unfounded unilateral military actions from taking place or indeed unfounded joint military actions in the case that France/UK should support the US in any new mad military campaign against Iran. As it is though the US could barely afford such a war in terms of its deteriorating image worldwide/further increase in anti americanism as well as financially i.e. it is already running up billions of ocsts in Iraq already!

Michael D

Michael, london, England

Gee, I hope all of you who are cheerleading for the Great and Glorious Conquest of Persia are ready for the consequences. Funny how the guys saying the attack will be a walk in the park are the same guys who got us into the fetid swamp in Iraq. Also quite hilarious how another nation with terrorist ties - Saudi Arabia - isn't on the list to be attacked. But I guess all those guys on the planes that hit the towers on 9/11 were Iranian, only this fact wasn't reported by our "liberal media". So bomb away, boys. Say goodbye to the state of Israel, too, because if you think Iran hasn't been planning for this for many years you're kidding yourselves. We are dealing with one of the most advanced and ancient cultures of the middle east, not a bunch of naked bedouins living in caves, and I am sure if they know they are going down they will take Israel with them, to the delight of the Palestinians and Arabs living there. Don't expect me to help you mop up the blood of US soldiers, tho.

Dominic P. Lucarelli, Springville, Tennessee

Si vis pacem, para bellum.
The preferable means of averting the combined nuclear and terrorist menace from Iran are non-military:
a combination of economic sanctions, sabotage and subversion. These medicines are likely to suffice if administered in large doses, inducing either capitulation or (much better) a regime change.

However, military options have to be prepared as well, in case the mullahs counter the non-military pressure
by violence, e.g. through terrorism or by an attempt to blockade the Gulf.

Jan W,, Lexington, USA

This is excellent news but it can't be a secret if it's in the news. Hopefully the Iranian tyrannical torturous regime will be put down soon.

Max, Newport, Canada

I believe: Bush-Cheney said it was about weapons of mass destruction. They said it was about the special aluminum in Nigeria. They said Iraq had involvement in 9/11. They said it was about bringing democracy to the middle east. In spite of the rhetoric, these claims have proven to be distortions of the truth, lies or weak and diluted suppositions at best. Now Iran says their nuclear development aspirations are all about generation of electricity, not bombs. Many "experts" say Iran is a long long way (years) from successful bomb development - even if that was what they're doing. With Bush-Cheney's record, who should believe their claims of bomb development? The Bush Cheney track record is consistently non-credible. They have an entirely different agenda in their minds. Probably all about money and neocon pipe dreams. They'll put spin on the rhetoric and tell any tale to support their position. Polls show Americans do not favor either Bush or the Congress - rightly so.

John Powell, Santa Clara del Cobre, Mexico (US citizen)

I dont think it was a misinformation i dont agree us should go to war with iran, but iran is terrorist state and its slap in face to all americans who is willing to let president of iran speak on our soil. Far left would say something such as us is trying to take control in mideast. We are in iraq to denounce and rid terrorist, People who critisize our troops are not respecting the men and women in uniform they there for reason to protect us and to ensure our protection. Us As americans should support them troops no matter what. United States is better off using hard sanctions on iran military option should be last resort.

Gabriel Sanchez, Orlando, Florida USA

Brilliance in your few short words Susan.

...They love their apple$.

chris, kansas city, kansas

Classic response Mr. Hughs...truly worthy of Berkeley, CA!

Moonbats, UNITE!!!

Jack Kennedy, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

It sounds like our military is on the ball which is what we have come to expect from the world's best military! I would like to see them formulate a plan to include Syria as well! Was good to see lots of favorable comment on this! The only real bad one was from someone in Berzerkley (Berkeley) in California! I hold my nose every time I have to drive through that socialist cesspool! God bless our military and it is also good to see that our best friend (Great Britain) is with us on this effort too!

Craig, Sacramento, California USA

If a Republican is in the WH when we go to war with Iran, we will go in the front door like SWAT. If a Democrat is in the WH when we go to war with Iran, we will wait until the problem reaches critical mass and be backed into the war. Democrats do not know how to make war; they don't understand what it takes to make peace, either. Republicans don't quit just because there are some setbacks on the battlefield, or on Capitol Hill. Democrats always look for the nearest exit, leaving their dead and wounded, any allies, and the oppressed we went to liberate, behind.

Face it, the U.S. is in the Middle East to stay. For better or worse. No Democrat can extract us now. Should they form some strategy for an exit, the cost will turn out to be heavier than if we stayed.

As for Israel, they are surrounded by their enemies. This is a matter of survival for them. No more Holocausts.

Want to know how everything will turn out? Check with one of those obnoxious, Bible-believing Christians.

Stephen Sharp, Orlando, FL-USA

Israel attacks a site in Syria and gather nuclear material sent there from North Korea. Several North Korean and Iranian military experts are killed in the raid. Whether or not you feel threatened by terrorists with nuclear materials there is only one solution. Bomb the sites that are producing it. When we ultimately attack these sites in Iran it won't be a declaration of war on Iran but instead a proper response to the terrorist threat facing us.

Kevin, Port Hueneme, California

Have you ever been in Iran? Have you ever met an Iranian? I suggest it to know how Iranians are and how they think and live. Do you know that you can’t find any Iranians involved in at least one terrorist attack around the world? Do you know US supported Saddam during his attack to Iran? Do you know Saddam attacked Iran by chemical bombs which were given to him by France and Germany? Do you know US Navy attacked Iranian Airbus with more than 270 passengers in Persian Gulf? Do you know that captain was awarded by US? When I read some of these comments I really realize that how is possible to change the reality and show it in another way to the entire world.

Alireza, Tehran, Iran

War for Oil may be a small part of the future. More important and much more obviously proven is the need to destroy everyone who plans to destroy all of us and is becoming quite able to do so.

Saddam Hussein planned and began to do that ten years before most Americans ever heard of him, but they knew it very well in Colombia. Most Americans still refuse to believe because news reports avoid it.

Marvin, St. Joseph, MI

To make sure that Iran does not get the Atomic Bomb is one of histories most crucial enterprises. We are looking through the looking glass into pre-WW2 Germany. If that means attacking Iran in prevention of what may come later so be it.

Tony Andrews, London,

Simon from Berkeley and Joan from the Beltway are living in cloud cuckoo land! As are all leftists.
In this imperfect world, with huge discrepancies between developed and undeveloped cultures, war remains an essential instrument of foreign policy.
One cannot reason or negotiate with fanatics, specially not Jihadists who have disdain for anyone not of their faith and who are ready to commit suicide for their cause.
The spectre of a nuclear -armed Iran is terrifying, given their attitude to Israel, despite what Joan says. Iran is not Arab, but it is most definitely part of the ME. And it has positioned itself as the champion of Jihad and hugely anti-Israel.
There is no doubt that the IDF wiil attack Iran to destroy its nuclear/missile facilities if the West does nothing. Israel has many thermo-nuclear warheads and it can be expected to use them if Iran retaliates, or maybe pre-emptively. So we face a nuclear conflict if the US does nothing.
Much better if the US does the job.

Jack Jameson, Johannesburg, South Africa

It's all about money! Pitiful Humanity for sure...

Susan, Fremont, USA/CA

In reality, it's has nothing to do with Iran's alleged developement of nuclear weapons but everything to do with the US's desire for geopolitical control and domination of Iran as well the entire middle and near east, and control/ownership of Iran's oil and gas reserves(not to mention the petroleum reserves of that part of the world as a whole).
The alleged statement by Iran's president regarding Israel being "wiped off the map" was a deliberate mistranslation by Western interests of what he actually said.
Those in the West who say that the only thing that Middle Eastern cultures(actually, Iran is neither Arab nor part of the Middle East) understand is "brute force" are speaking from an arrogant and racist mind set.
An attack on Iran will be disasterous for America and the West. It will open a Pandora's box of incredible proportions.
Iran is far from stupid. They are prepared to respond in unorthodox but extremely effective ways,
Remember, they invented Chess.

Simon Hughs, Berkeley, California / US

Insanity. Absolute insanity. Attacking Iran will produce huge losses of life and property, a destruction of any remaining democracy in the US as BushCo moves to a neonazi dictatorship, and likely will take us into World War III. Americans will not stand for a military draft and are already outraged at where the Bush regime has taken us. Think about nuclear Pakistan, nuclear Israel. Surely you can see that any quality of life we might have will evaporate and will likely upend our climate and environment. Think about the lives of your children if you won't think of yours.

Then consider negotiation, education, consultation, understanding, religious tolerance, and what kind of world that would lead to.

Joan Stallard, Washington DC, USA

The military of any nation that isn't planning in detail for possible future conflicts isn't earning its pay. The sad thing is that the media treats such planning like a stunning revelation. You can bet that if the lack of such planning resulted in undesired results, the media would be clambering all over the military for NOT doing such planning.

David Jones, Middletown, RI

"To concede defeat _ as many leading Democrats now advocate _ would strengthen al-Qaida, empower Iran and other hostile powers in the Middle East, unleash a full-scale civil war in Iraq that could quite possibly provoke genocide there, and destabilize the entire region." – Mitt Romney

The world wasn't safe when Saddam had WMD's. It won't be safe if Iran gets them either!

Who ya gonna call?

Mel, Chicago, USA

Certainly an invasion of Iran is being planned. Also a response to an attack by Iran on US naval forces. Also an attack on India. And that UK planners are prepared to respond to an attack on British naval forces. The military's job is to be ready to do what its government orders and to defend itself. And do it now.

David Campbell, Carson City, NV, US

Guys can't we stop this press talk and start thinking how to make friends with all countries... Is war the only way to resolve problems...I think Churchill is dead....

Elie Mansour, Beirut, Lebanon

I think that Americans are very good at air wars and technological wars in general. Therefore there won't be any problem to crash Iranian air defence. The main problem is the 'day after" problem.

Anton Ponomarev, Moscow, Russia

Sadly, what most people in the West do not realize is that Middle Eastern cultures considers diplomacy as working from weakness. Brute force, and lots of it, are the only things they seem to respect. In addition, Western society cannot allow Iran to create, possess or deploy such terrible weapons. The Iranian president has made his (and his master's) intentions clear. They openly call for the destruction of Israel, America and their allies. It is our responsibility to take action to prevent blackmail and slaughter of countless innocents. No one wants military action more than I, however, sometimes there is no choice but to act in advance.

Alex, Los Angeles, USA

THE GOD OF WAR

The Drums of War are beating ever louder for a war with Iran.

If the Bush regime would be in power for the next 100 years, it seems that the USA would be at war for the next 100 years.

Garth Strong, San Diego, USA/CAL

“Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”

Jim, Durham, NC, USA

How come the Dems only attack Bush and not the

terrorists? Where are our leaders when we need them?

I don't see any real statesmen in Congress.

Joy Deich, East Wenatchee, Douglas/WA

I believe that War with Iran will not be the same with IRAQ,things are different. USA and allies should stop playing GOD in this world,they are hated enough already.IRAN will never be the threat everyone thinks,they will negogiate with anyone just to stay alife!! Presence of Iran versus Saudia as 2 powers on different terms is in favour of Isreal and the west.
Give us a break!!

Omar, Dubai, UAE

Abizaid did such a splendid job of strategizing in Iraq, why wouldn't we want him to plan our strategy for dealing with Iran?

Tom W., Royal Oak, Michigan

I fear that this time, war is inevitable unless Iran backs down which seems unlikely.

What Ahmadinejad is doing now is digging his own grave.

Steve, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England

How can the US have any credibility by attacking a country for violating a treaty that Israel has refused to even sign?

bob smith, easton, ct

Why is it that even when we know Iran wants to destroy Israel, when we know they support terrorism, when we know they are developing capabilities that will lead to a nuclear bomb, when we know they will give nukes to terrorists...why is it that liberals always and only attack BUSH?

Scott, Seattle, USA

Iranians are not Arabs. They are Persians. They share a religion with the Arabs. I do not believe that the U.S. buys oil from Iran.

Brian, Wetumpka, Alabama, US

I suspect General Abazid's comments were taken out of context. At any rate, he is not saying the world would be safer. In fact it will be much harder to keep the peace, and the chances of a nuclear exchange will be higher. Will the world survive? Yes. Will millions die? Probably.

J Baustian, San Diego, California

Coming to a theater near you soon! Thanx!

Simone, Hollywood, CA. U.S.A.

Like father ,like son. When George H.W.Bush lost the presidential elections in 1992, he started an American military intervention in Somalia,and left a big mess for Bill Clinton to deal with.Now,it seems that George W.Bush is intent on creating a much bigger mess and leaving it to Mrs. Clinton , or whoever will be elected president, to deal with. Is it a family tradition in the Bush clan,to start a mess after another,and leave the clean-up to those who come after them?!!!!!!!!!!!. I thought it was a sign of maturity,that you clean after yourself,before your exit.Dubya had two terms to create a mess after another,without considering the consequences.
Frankly ,I find this to be totally irresponsible,and a major character flaw that runs in that God forsaken family.

Sam, Dallas, USA

Iran reminds me of Hitler in Germnany in 1936, he told the world what he was going to do, the world sat by, did nothing, then after he invaded Europe we had to go and clean up the mess, there was no reason for all those inncocent people to die, except for the fact that the politicians didn't have the backbone to stand up and do what's right. What is amazing is that it was Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat along with Winston Churchill, that took the bull by th horns and got the job done. Unfortunatley, there is no talent like that in the current crop of Democrats. Hopefully we can clone Reagan soon.

Fred, Rancho Cordova, USA, California

I believe the problem in attacking Iran now is not Iran itself, or its ability to defend itself or respond in some way that can hurt us, but it is Russia, who has a very deep interest in Iran's nuclear/military infrastructure. They can hurt us, and this is what the administration and U.S. military is calculating. In an indirect way, China cooperates with America's enemies, and will smile at us, while stabbing us in the throat. The UN can be counted on to stall on behalf of Iran's interests, so it will come down to a decision by the U.S. and Israel to risk the consequences of angering the great Russian bear to action.

Art Drexler, San Diego, CA

Having been in Iraq for several years of my life, I know for a fact that this war would be over by now if it wasn't for Irans medling and support (or anti-support). But that aside, the threat of Iran willingly giving a terrorist group (Im sure any would do) a nuclear device to wage their proxy war with would be the second 9/11 that everyone has been fearing. It may not happen back home where you all live, but it would definitely be a American or other Ally target. Iran has to be stopped at some point, why not have be Bush's last Hoah! before he steps down.

Trip, Baghdad,

George Bush and Dick Cheney should call Bill Gates and other major computer suppliers into the White House and have them, in a clandestine fashion, design a system that would access all of the worlds computers, especially in the Middle East. Take control and explain to all of the people of the Middle East that the Regemes they live under are about to lead them into total destruction. Tell them they need to overthrow these governments and establish governments that are not "Waring Governments". Then someone needs to take Bush and Cheney out, (of power).

Mike, Maple Ridge, Canada

The five permanent members of the UNSC should be the only nations allowed to have nuclear enrichment capability. Not because they are 'better' than any other nation but because they have refrained from the use of nuclear weapons over the past 60 years. If Iran wants peaceful nuclear energy it should be willing to have its reactor fuels supplied by the UNSC member of its choice.

Scott Angell, Richmond, USA

Interestingly Iran gets a mention in Bible prophecy. There is
a joint Russian-Iranian attack on Israel (Ezekiel 38 & 39)
which goes badly. And in the book of Daniel the King of the
South (Which many think is Iran) pushes against the King of
the North (Which many think is the European Union) resulting
in a great defeat for the King of the South. How America fits
into Biblical Prophecy is much less clear.

Roger, Weymouth, England

Iraq was not a threat. Iran simply talks as the Russians did during the cold war. Are decision makers really so foolish as to start yet another, unneeded war?

Farrukh, Woking, UK

Last time it was "weapons of mass destruction", in the mid-1950s it was "the bomber gap". This time it's a denied and unproven nuclear arms race with the Israelis. Bush was a lame-duck president destined to an undistinguished presidency. Now he's bombing and killing his way into the history books. Who can help us? Certainly not Bush's God.

Bill Peter, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Gen Mac is right. We had better make sure Iran doesn't turn nukes over to AlQaeda and the only way to ensure that doesn't happen is to destroy them. That General Abizaid is apparently willing to take that chance is frightening.

susan boyer, brevard, usa/nc

"The Iran Problem", Hamid? You sound like the chaps who solved the "Jewish Problem".
Take it easy here, boys. Iraq has been a disaster; Iran would be apocalyptic in it's knock on effects.
Tinkering from the outside is one thing but an invasion would certainly bring great pain to all concerned, and some that are not.

Milo, Shanghai, China

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not rational. Any military action will result in Iran going 'NUTS'. Non-Conventional and Conventional forces will be activated and sent into action against the west and the jewish state. There will be no controlling or limiting the use of force.

Glenn E. Bell, Chandler, USA/Arizona

As the Iranians will never confront the US directly. They are extremely likely to share their weapons grade uranium with their proxy terrorist organizations.

Talking is not working. Iran thumbs its nose at the world everyday, and ignoring the situation is shear irresponsibility.

No western nation will be spared by the nuclear terrorism that will be unleashed in the name of establishing the next caliphite. You can't make peace with fanatics that are bent on the destruction of non-muslim societies. It may be hard to face, but the only way to deal with this messianic fervor is to stop it before it can happen.

Edward Hoffman, New York, NY/USA

As the old saying goes ......

"Sleep well tonight, your Air Force is awake."

Bill Smith, St. Petersburg, Florida

The internal informat that gave up this information is either a dead man or is a member of the administration. They either let this out at this time to put Iran on notice during the UN meeting or it was released by a person sympathetic to the democrats. and only time will tell.

The Syrian attack by Isreal was not play and since no one really has condemed it there is lots of truth in it.

Either way Iran is on notice and that is a good thing. This is not over and Bush is not going to leave office with this still festering. Either it will get solved or he is going to launch an attack.

Alan, Phoenix/aAZ, Az/USA

The war in Iraq won't be over until the current regime in Iran is overthrown. You just have to worry about what Russia would do since this is all a proxy war with them to begin with.The cold war really never ended.

Jake, Springfield, USA

Welcome to the Real World, Times. Military organizations constantly work up new or modify existing warplans covering every imaginable contingency. Even so, sometimes we're taken by surprise.
As far as preparing a plan for assaulting Iran goes? Nothing new. I was on active duty, working with the SEALs when the scumbag ayatollahs invaded our embassy and took all those people prisoner. At the time, we (I had a minuscule part) worked up a penetrate-by-sea attack scenario.
We even have, as you may have heard, a plan for war with Canada in case such becomes necessary. And one for taking out London and seizing your royals as hostages. Doesn't mean it's even 01% likely to happen. You do the same sort of planning.

Moses Lambert, Lincoln, USA / Nebraska

Checkmate almost lost the current Iraq war before it started due to its lack of "imagination" with regard to the planned positioning of Russian forces in Bagdad immediately before the US invasion, a potential Russian, something for nothing, checkmate. If they have not changed their "perspective" in analysis, that is looking at an attack from the viewpoint of the interests of other countries with goals of maintaining "influence" in the region or bolstering world influence, this time, they could be presiding over a real embarassment. Rice, a supposed student of foreign psyche, needs to reinforce the group so that we are not bushwacked. No pun intended.

Thomas E. Shafovaloff, Winter Park, Florida

Glad to hear that we're preparing.

bluecollarbytes, USA,

Good.

Brunhilde Flangebottom, Roehampton, England

Guess we didn't use Checkmate to plan the Iraq debacle, huh?

ronski, SAINT PETERSBURG, FL, USA

Oh, but I forgot, Rummy had it all figured out, eh?

ronski, SAINT PETERSBURG, FL, USA

I am very pleased to know that our military is planning ahead! I would be most disappointed, if they weren't!

DUTCH vanATL, Atlanta, GA, USA

Setting up more alternate chains of command? Who's in charge here anyway?

Robert J Molineaux, Redfield, New York, USA

I agree with General Abizaid. Diplomatically and economically, I think we should do everything we can to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. But failing that, the world could live with it if it does.

I am opposed to attacking Iran militarily, which it appears we are already clandestinely engage in. I think the neocons who planned the Iraq disaster knew that removing Saddam Hussein from power would also end Iraq as a containment force for Iran, and intended from the start to attack Iran afterwards.

That is what happens in the "endless wars for endless peace" scenarios. There is always just one more "rogue nation" which has to be "taken out" before we can have real peace.

The Bush foreign policy is disastrous, but I think whoever succeeds him is basically committed to a "Bush LIght" foreign policy. Certainly McCain, Romney, Guiliani, Thompson, and likely Obama (he, too, favors staying in Iraq) favor continuing the policy.

randolph Phillips, Shiloh, USA

The sooner the Iran problem is taken care, the easier, lest costly and less deadly.

Even if we acto tomorrow, it will still be messy, but you gotta do what you gotta do.

Avoiding the problem, wishing that it will go away or some how will solve itself, will not change the facts and the reality.

Go for it!

Hamid, Mission Viejo, California

Excellent idea. We should always be looking at the best way to get the job done by thinking outside the box. When major commands do not have the people or time to delve deeper into a plan , it is good to know someone is following up. It is not provocative , its good planning and strategy.

gerry, englewood , florida

If Checkmate is so wonderful and effective, where was it when the US blundered into Iraq? The same bunch of clowns will make a bigger mess in Iran.

Anthony Podesta, Singapore, Singapore

The oil barrel is the biggest problem facing any idea of bombing Iran. It isn't about whether we can accomplish our goals in a strike--it is about the sure $100+ per barrel of oil that is the worrisome part of this.

Also, we have to understand that the Iranians would attempt to attack Israel and thus begin a conflict in that region that would practically strangle the economy of the world. Why? Oil.

We buy oil from Iran and yet declare them our arch enemies. We pay them to exist and operate. They use our money to kill and torture those they dislike.

The myopic view of past administrations in the United States has perpetuated this over and again with oil and the Arabs.

Ricky, Asheville,

One Sane Head

" Responding to French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner warnings that the world had to be prepared for the possibility of war if Iran acquired atomic weapons, he characterized talk of attacking Iran as "hype", saying: "I would not talk about any use of force.There are rules on how to use force, and I would hope that everybody would have gotten the lesson after the Iraq situation, where 70,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives on the suspicion that a country has nuclear weapons." "We need to be cool," he said, adding: "We need not to hype the issue."[2]

He further added "I do not believe at this stage that we are facing a clear and present danger that requires we go beyond diplomacy."[3 "

Will, Raleigh, USA/NC

I pray Checkmate makes the word "intelligence" mean something and not lead the US into another ill advised debacle.

isidro garcia, Corpus Christi, United States, Tx.