Tag Archives: Leon Panetta

Pentagon’s backup plan places hundreds of Tomahawks near Iran

While Iran continues to deny that it is developing nuclear weapons, Washington is still concerned in the region and has now deployed approximately 430 Tomahawk missiles in the Persian Gulf.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has reported that their plan for Iran “will be successful” according to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. In an interview between Blitzer and Panetta, it was advised that Washington has not yet dropped its “all options stance” on Iran. The Pentagon still fears that Tehran may be building nuclear weapons. Panetta said: “We are prepared with all options on the table if we have to respond,” and added “there are plans to deal with Iran if the country does not give up its nuclear ambitions. I don’t think there is any question that if we have to implement that plan, it will be successful.” In a practical approach, two U.S. aircraft carriers, several submarines, battle groups and additional marines will be deployed in the Gulf. Both the Pentagon and the U.S. Navy have said that the commissions are “routine”. However, Interfax news agency said that the group, headed by the USS Enterprise, has taken at least 130 Tomahawk missiles to the Persian Gulf. Another group of warships lead by the USS Abraham LIncoln is carrying many similar long-range cruise missiles and was last reported to be patrolling the Arabian sea. The U.S. Navy says this is to provide air support to NATO troops in Afghanistan. Along with these ships, the submarine USS George is also in the area and is estimated to be carrying 154 Tomahawks. A second submarine which is assigned to an amphibious assault group apparently has some 12 cruise missiles on board. This makes a total of at least 430 Tomahawks, which have a range of 1,700 km in the waters of the Persian Gulf. In combination, these Tomahawk missiles are able to totally take out Iran’s air-defense system and to turn the country’s military airfields to rubble. While Washington says that the first round of nuclear talks with Tehran gave “positive feelings”, there has been no alleviation in the sanctions imposed on Iran’s economy. Iran continues to deny that it is attempting to build nuclear weapons and stresses that it is the country’s right to produce nuclear energy for power and medical needs.By Anne Sewell

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/323388#ixzz1ssoYu6Hm

She left out French n English ships there as well,plus we have a 3rd not to far away.. Going to be a hot summer I think..

Advertisements

Kim Jong-un’s first provocation—Why the U.S. should respond forcibly

In a less-than-shocking turn of events, North Korea has announced that it will launch a satellite into orbit next month. This launch, as with the last satellite launch, will amount to a ballistic missile test; United Nations Security Council resolutions have banned such launches. Better yet, Pyongyang has said it will launch the missile southward—potentially over South Korean territory. Such a move would be highly provocative, to say the least.

North Korea and weapons of mass destruction

Put simply, this test cannot be permitted, especially as it comes in the immediate wake of the (poorly considered) U.S. deal with the North: food aid in return for a number of North Korean concessions including a moratorium on long-range missile tests. The United States has already called “on North Korea to adhere to its international obligations, including all relevant U.N. Security Council Resolutions.” Such admonishments are unlikely to be convincing.

Rather, if the United States wishes for North Korea to take it seriously—if Pyongyang is ever to take seriously the accords it agrees to—then Washington must demonstrate a seriousness of purpose that has too often been lacking. In this regard, President Obama has two options. He can order that U.S. forces strike the missile on the launch pad or, somewhat less provokingly, order that missile defense assets shoot it down after launch.

Some, of course, will argue that an American resort to military means so early in Kim Jong-un’s rule will irreparably sour a potentially more productive relationship than that with Kim Jong-il. But it is Kim who has broken faith only two weeks after the first U.S.-DPRK bilateral agreement. The relationship soured the moment Pyongyang announced the satellite launch.

Others will say that U.S. military action will enhance North Korea’s drive for nuclear weapons and make a spring nuclear test more likely. But the 2006 and 2009 nuclear tests followed U.N. Security Council condemnations of earlier missile tests. In other words, North Korea’s bar for conducting nuclear tests is already set fairly low. (Maybe we should just ignore the missile launch, chalk it up to Kim being Kim?)

Finally, some will counter that use of force is needlessly escalatory. But escalation is precisely what is needed. Unless the United States responds decisively to Kim Jong-un’s first provocation as the leader of North Korea, it will have reason to expect more of the same in the coming years.

English: From a mass game in North Korea, 2007.

If the United States responds militarily to the planned rocket launch, it will demonstrate to those around Kim that he cannot act without fear of consequence as his father could. It will help prevent “young Kim from establishing his bona fides as the new strongman in Pyongyang.” And given that the launch will likely result in the withholding of recently promised U.S. food aid, the new leader may face heightened civil discontent as well.

If, in the long term, the United States has an interest in a unified Korea under Seoul’s democratic leadership, then Washington must take steps to weaken Kim now. True, allowing Kim to further consolidate his rule may buy us short-term stability (I use the term loosely). But we’ve been watching that movie for the past few decades and we haven’t been enjoying it. Isn’t it time to change the DVD?

By Michael Mazza for The American

Iranian general urges Afghanistan to fight U.S.

Mullah’s are starting to really push their luck…

(AP)  TEHRAN: A senior Iranian military commander urged Afghans on Saturday to use force to kick American troops out of their country, hinting that “new resistance groups” could launch attacks on U.S. interests in Afghanistan.

Brigadier General Masoud Jazayeri, a senior figure in the powerful Revolutionary Guard and the deputy head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said there are indications that Afghans will “soon open new fronts” against “the obsolete, worn-out American empire.”

The U.S. has accused Iran’s Revolutionary Guard of supplying powerful roadside bombs to militants in Afghanistan fighting NATO forces. Iran has denied that it is supplying arms to fighters in Afghanistan.

Anti-U.S. sentiments have grown in Afghanistan after the killing of 16 civilians, including nine children, allegedly by a U.S. soldier in southern Kandahar province, as well the accidental burning of Quran holy books by American troops. The U.S. soldier has been identified as Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, 38.

“Based on the existing indications, new fronts will soon be opened against invaders in order to ground the obsolete, worn-out American empire,” Jazayeri said. “Creation of resistance groups and hitting American interests are among measures that can be taken.”

He did not elaborate. The comments by Jazayeri were posted Saturday on the Guard’s website, sepahnews.com. It is the strongest comments ever by an Iranian official against American troops in Afghanistan.

“The Americans must know that the Afghan nation … is tired of the illegitimate presence of invaders … and deserve to use force and offensive operations to kick invading enemies from their soil,” he said.

Jazayeri said Afghans should make their territory unsafe for American troops.

“The United States should not be immune from the biting attacks for insulting Quran and massacring the innocent Afghan and Pakistani people. American troops must experience the bitter taste of revenge so that they won’t feel security in any part of the region,” he said.

The U.S. and Tehran are at odds over Iran’s controversial nuclear program, and some analysts fear that Iran will respond with proxy forces if the confrontation becomes violent.