Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Scott Ritter 'the United States will drop a nuclear bomb on Iran'

The former U.N. weapons inspector who said Iraq disarmed long before the U.S. invasion in 2003 is warning Americans to prepare for a war with Iran.

"We just don't know when, but it's going to happen," Scott Ritter said to a crowd of about 150 at the James A. Little Theater last Sunday night.

Ritter described how the U.S. government might justify war with Iran in a scenario similar to the buildup to the Iraq invasion. He also argued that Iran wants a nuclear energy program, and not nuclear weapons. But the Bush administration, he said, refuses to believe Iran is telling the truth.

He predicted the matter will wind up before the U.N. Security Council, which will determine there is no evidence of a weapons program. Then, he said, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, "will deliver a speech that has already been written. It says America cannot allow Iran to threaten the United States and we must unilaterally defend ourselves."

"How do I know this? I've talked to Bolton's speechwriter," Ritter said.

Ritter also predicted the military strategy for war with Iran. First, American forces will bomb Iran. If Iranians don't overthrow the current government, as Bush hopes they will, Iran will probably attack Israel. Then, Ritter said, the United States will drop a nuclear bomb on Iran.

The only way to prevent a war with Iran is to elect a Democratically controlled Congress in November, said Ritter, a lifelong Republican. He later said he wasn't worried his advice would be seen as partisan because, "It's a partisan issue." He said the problem is oneparty government and if Democrats controlled the presidency and Congress, he would advise people to elect Republicans.

Read more at the source.

Now we could say this is accurate. We could also attack it by saying Mr Ritter is just trying to push forward his new book.We could suppose that both those things are true or even that both are false. But the subject matter is mass genocide and that is far to serious to just ignore. Mr Ritter is claiming that the US will attack another sovereign nation without international law or the international community on their side again and he is mentioning a scenario where the US will launch a nuclear attack upon a country that has not used such barbaric weapons against anyone.

Nobody should gloss over such a claim (whether it be true or false) especially when the consequences of such an attack on Iran would be a swift and immediate response from Russia and China. Attacking Iran in this way would not be the end of a sentence but the beginning of a paragraph that would not just kill millions in the Middle East but would very likely end up wiping out the very people who were so keen to start such an unprovoked attack in the first place.

Please read our comment rules if you wish to give us your opinion on this article.


Blogger _H_ said...

Please note : Wishing to nuke or attack Iran without factual justification that would be supported by the IAEA, the United Nations and its Security Council would be classed as support of an act of genocide and would probably be classed as hate speech on this site.

If your view is simply that democratic Iran should be attacked without the international authority to do so then please don't waste your time here. We are interested in any view as long as it consists of working with the international community and its infrastructure towards finding solutions based upon factual evidence.

Factual evidence is for example the current wording of the draft resolution prepared for the possible security council resolution. It is not some book or article that may or may not be popular in the wider world but has no basis on the reality that the IAEA see on the ground.

February 08, 2006 12:24 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Iran is just trying for nucleur energy? Have you lost your head?

Iran has openly tried to obtain nucleur weapons to wipe out Israel for a very very long time.
You are right on one count, there will be a War with Iran, and I expect it will start in a month.

February 08, 2006 2:02 am  
Blogger _H_ said...

oh ok Anonymous, then I should abandon the fact of 1400 days of go anywhere , see anything IAEA inspections that made no such conclusion and just take your word for it along with the American press and a few people trying to make a quick buck on book sales.

Did you read all that in a newspaper ? It certainly didn't come from the only credible source of information which is the IAEA itself . Maybe you personally have spent 1400 days going where you like , when you like in Iran and have actually been and seen the bombs being built ?

If your so sure why are you telling me ? why are you not contacting the IAEA as we speak to inform them of the wisdom you have gained that they have missed whilst actually inspecting the country ?

And if you have not been to the country and you have not inspected the sites yourself then on what bases do you put your confidence ? because you read it somewhere ?

The full IAEA recommendations are on this site and they do not mention once that Iran is building a bomb so why have you not told them ?

I Doubt you care very much about the lives that will be lost in such a fictitious war but maybe you do care about the lives of your own countrymen that would be lost in such a war. Please go to the IAEA web site , read it , if you thing you know more than they do then tell them and maybe this time next week we can consider your theory to have some base in fact .

Until then please read the article and leave your unqualified opinions and desires for war outside.

Finally as I am sure you have noted in the comment rules . Please supply factual evidence that is accaptable to the standards of the IAEA to this site to justify your view and note that does not mean newspaper articles.

February 08, 2006 2:28 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am with you _H_ it sounds about as credible as the lies we were told about Iraq.

February 08, 2006 2:53 am  
Blogger weekbyweek said...

We had a look at Ritter in December last year at http://weekbyweek7.blogspot.com/2005/12/frowns-sighs-guffaws-shock-awe-style.html and learned that in 2003, the British broadsheet newspaper, the Telegraph discovered that:

“Iraq’s intelligence services bought gold jewellery that they planned to give to the wife and daughter of Scott Ritter… as part of a clandestine project to encourage him to work closely with Saddam Hussein’s regime, according to documents discovered by The Telegraph in Baghdad.”

February 08, 2006 11:14 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The same Daily Telegraph that falsely accused MP George Galloway of being on S Hussein's payroll?

The same Telegraph that received dubious Iraqi Intelligence Service documents; conveniently found intact among the rubble of a devastated building and handed to a Telegraph journalist. Documents that may well have been planted forgeries, designed to discredit pain-in-the-backside anti-war critic Galloway? Documents that appeared on TV and were written in English? (LoL!!!)

The Telegraph is just another pro-war mouthpiece I'm afraid.

Ritter I believe is an honest man who, despite his establisment career, has chosen to walk the path of truth. Not many people seem prepared to do that these days.

I'm just waiting for one of the US cabinet to roll out another barrage of lies and gross distortions against Iran.


Iraq might have been a military walkover. Iran will involve considerably higher losses. If the Americans are seriously considering using nuclear weapons on Iran, then those people are clearly insane beyond belief. There can never be any justification for using such weapons. No nation needs them. Any nation that uses them should be severely punished.

February 08, 2006 12:17 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The US is the only country that has ever used nuclear weapons and will use them again.

The rationale could easily be that: 1) Iran's facilities are under hardened bunkers and only nukes will be effective, and 2) any "conventional" bomb would result in radioactive fallout anyway.

The real reason is expediency. The US populace wouldn't tolerate a ground war in Iran. Moreover, the US military is impotent and can't even control Iraq, it must use cowardly weapons to succeed in Iran. As in Iraq, the occupiers will never be able to overcome the will of the people to resist them. If you want an example, there are dozens, but look no further than the British occupation of the colonies and the guerilla (eg, terrorist) activities of the militia that became the US government.

To the Bush cabal, Iran is only a piece of real estate between Iraq and Afganistan with oil underneath.

There is no strategy, or logical approach on the part of the Bush cabal. They thrive on chaos, panic, anxiety, and fear.

It is tragic that people argue about this adminsitration from a geopolitical and military perspective, when what we are really confronting is a delusional sociopath in control of the world's largest military. Haven't we learned anything from Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and Mao?

February 08, 2006 1:26 pm  
Blogger Truth Seeker said...

Unfortunately, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the US were to use a nuclear weapon against Iran.

The US is the only country ever to drop a nuclear weapon on another country, and the current rogue regime in Washington have stated that they would not rule out the use of such dreadful weapons.

I think that tells us all we need to know.

It is interesting that all the rabid right wingers who would claim that the UN should get out ofthe US have nothing to say on the subject of various US breaches of international law, and how there have been no UN resolutions against the US on all of these breaches. Perhaps those who claim that they don't like the UN in the US should consider who wields vasts amounts of power in the organisation, and also ponder on why no such resolutions have been forthcoming.

February 08, 2006 2:09 pm  
Blogger Unknown said...

Anon of February 08, 2006 2:02 AM, you are pushing the edge. Tone it down or enter the void.

"Iran has openly tried to obtain nucleur weapons to wipe out Israel for a very very long time."

Provide evidence or begone.

Weekbyweek, the smear campaigns against Ritter (he's taking money from Iraqis, he's a pedophile) have two things in common: they started right after he would not toe the party line & they have been shown to be false over time.

February 09, 2006 2:08 am  
Blogger rygnn2@voteswagon.com said...

The country of Iran is definitely out there in its ideologies, lets hope they don't get nuked but it appears if they could they would nuke others close around them.
Raymond B

February 09, 2006 2:30 am  
Blogger vOyNiK said...

Since the end of the cold war, the US has been preparing for a nuclear demonstration to break the "taboo" (notice Chirac's speach). and Iran has always been the target hence, Afghanistan and Iraq trrop build-up. To boot, we get "control" of the Caspian sea and all the oil reserves in preparation of peak oil which we're already experiencing.
It's not pretty but it;'s the brutal reality.
The plan has been written a long time ago and we're not going to change it rgardless whos president.

February 09, 2006 12:58 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...


I agree that it 'appears' that Iran will attack others 'probably Israel' but looking at the facts in the cold light of day paints a very different picture.

Three very real reasons why Iran would not Nuke (if they had one) Israel

(1) They would kill thousands of Palestinians (the very people they are angry with Israel for)nuclear weapons do not pick and choose who they kill . If Iran was to wipe out Palestine (which such an attack would) they would not be hero's in the Arab world by any stretch of the imagination.

(2) A nuclear strike against Israel would receive a swift nuclear reaction from the United States / the UK and Israel . Using a single bomb against the Israelis would bring so many nukes raining down on Iran that the country would cease to exist. (It would be wiped off the map)

(3) Iran doesn't start wars , our press can demonize them as much as they like but there is no history to show Iran as being a country that starts wars with anyone. (unlike their 'enemies')

February 09, 2006 6:11 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home