by whataboutbob
Sun Apr 9th, 2006 at 08:15:05 AM EST
Seymour Hersh has a sobering article in the April 17th edition of the New Yorker Magazine that is well worth the time to read: The Iran Plans
The Bush Administration, while publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increased clandestine activities inside Iran and intensified planning for a possible major air attack.(...) One of the military’s initial option plans calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites.
A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”
(...)
“If you attack,” the high-ranking diplomat told me in Vienna, “Ahmadinejad will be the new Saddam Hussein of the Arab world, but with more credibility and more power. You must bite the bullet and sit down with the Iranians.” The diplomat went on, “There are people in Washington who would be unhappy if we found a solution. They are still banking on isolation and regime change. This is wishful thinking.” He added, “The window of opportunity is now.”
The question many are asking is, is this just a bluff to get Iran scared and to the negotiating table...or is Bush truly crazy enough to use "tactical nuclear weapons" on Iran? And can anything be done to stop this madness?