Could be true, or the Russians may have the wrong end of the stick, or they may just be feeding false information to their journalists to further their own interests (Putin manipulating the media? That'd never happen!).
Publius | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 5:22 pm | #

Hmmm... if the US managed to actually knock out Iran without anyone getting strat-nuked, imagine the world-wide response.

...

Ok, now that you've imagined what happens if and when they fail to take out Iran, what then?
Hidden One | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 5:50 pm | #

"Russian Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy of Geopolitical Sciences, said last week the Pentagon was planning to deliver a massive air strike on Iran's military infrastructure in the near future."

This does not seem to be a high-ranking source, nor does RIA-Novosti divulge the indentity of the other 'source'. It denominates it: 'Russian intelligence.'

However, there have been strong general statements recently from Putin, and from the FM, Lavrov. Then why are we hearing so-called specifics from the vice president of an obscure (to me anyway) think-tank?
Pavel Chichikov | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 7:43 pm | #

Publius:

The nice thing about prophecies like this is that we will know whether they are accurate or not by 4AM Iran time on Good Friday.
Mark P. Shea | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 7:54 pm | #

True, assuming the plan (if it exists) wasn't changed the moment this story was published.
Publius | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 8:04 pm | #

I don't doubt it.

It's not the most credible source, but I have relatives currently serving in the Air Force who have been saying for the past year that they are preparing to go to war with Iran.
Hislittlelamb | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 8:10 pm | #

" True, assuming the plan (if it exists) wasn't changed the moment this story was published."

If there's a plan for next Friday that's locked in, it's not going to be changed now. But the situation is such that there's going to be more disinfo in the air, than mosquitos in Alaska in June (?).
Pavel Chichikov | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 8:11 pm | #

AM I missing something in the article. Where does it say this will occur on Good Friday
jh | 03.31.07 - 10:05 pm | #

jh,

As a general practice nations usually distribute their secret war plans to the press in advance so as to make the process of war making more enjoyable and interesting for the public - like a TV program, or a thrilling popular novel written for sale to the movies. Everything for show biz.

However, to deceive the prospective enemy not one but many different war plans are divulged.
Pavel Chichikov | Homepage | 03.31.07 - 11:57 pm | #

I have no faith in this plan working after the Israeli fiasco against the Iranian backed Hezbollah.
Ben | 04.01.07 - 12:24 am | #

This is silly. The Pentagon has plans for attacking just about everybody, and the existence of plans per se means nothing.
TomM | 04.01.07 - 12:47 pm | #

So - The Iranians have captured a dozen British seamen - the type of thing they have done several time B4.

The Iranians are developing nuclear capability for ostensibly power generation - something sveral other countries have done over the last few decades.

The UN are imposing sanctions - a waste of time given the corruption in te UN, and the sanction busting Chinese, French and Russians.

Does *ALL* this constitute cause for war? I think not - even given that idiot president Admedinijab (Spelling??) and his lunatic ravings.

Actually, his name reminds me of the Peter Sellars song in the movie (can't just remember the title) in the late 50's/early 60's in his role as an Indian doctor;
"...I remember how with one jab
Of my needle in the Punjab
How I cleared up Beriberi
And the dreaded dysentery...."

So I agree with TomM - it won't happen.
Don.(Kiwi) | 04.01.07 - 3:55 pm | #

Good Friday may be an appropriate pray to watch and pray, and perhaps to mourn. But it is a most inappropriate day to begin a military attack of any kind. It is the highest holy day on the Christian calendar. Surely, no Christian president would pick this day for a sneak attack on a foreign country.
Michael | 04.01.07 - 4:58 pm | #

Surely, no Christian president would pick this day for a sneak attack on a foreign country.

We we are talking about Dubya here, after all.
Sean P. Dailey | Homepage | 04.01.07 - 10:12 pm | #

NPR did a program about life on the John C. Stennis for the radio show "This American Life. you can check it out here : http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Ep...spx? episode=206
Anonymous | 04.02.07 - 1:17 am | #

It's not the most credible source, but I have relatives currently serving in the Air Force who have been saying for the past year that they are preparing to go to war with Iran.


Not to be too harsh here or to show support or lack thereof for any future military operation against Iran, I just want to say that your Air Force relative shouldn't be saying these types of things. If he is privy to information of this sort then he has an obligation to keep a lid on it. This actually could be punished under the UCMJ. Loose lips sink ships.
goodform | 04.02.07 - 9:11 am | #

The US and the UK are not going to war with anyonebecasue we have neither the troops nor the political support for war under any circumstances.

The UK will eventually apologize and ransom their people. This story is already fading from the BBC reports. The hostages will return and go on the Oprah show to denounce us all.

I am amazed that Iran did not just seize the entire HMS Cornwall. If Iran was really smart they would have taken over the ship and announced that they did it because a Mohammedan officer radioed that the captain called him a nasty name - so the Iranians had to rescue him to protect his civil rights.
Michaelus | 04.02.07 - 10:40 am | #

But it is a most inappropriate day to begin a military attack of any kind. It is the highest holy day on the Christian calendar. Surely, no Christian president would pick this day for a sneak attack on a foreign country.

I don't think the military plans with an eye to the ecclesiastical calendar (unless it's to take the enemy by surprise, as in the case of George Washington's attack on Trenton on December 25, 1776). For example, my father was with the Marines on Easter Sunday, 1945, as they hit the beach on Okinawa.
Seamus | 04.02.07 - 10:47 am | #

" For example, my father was with the Marines on Easter Sunday, 1945, as they hit the beach on Okinawa."

God bless him, Seamus. That was a terrible battle.
Pavel Chichikov | Homepage | 04.02.07 - 11:09 am | #

ain't gonna happen on Good Friday or anytime soon......reminds of comments that the world will end on such and such date....
Tom | 04.02.07 - 1:08 pm | #

I suppose just the SUGGESTION that Bush intends to strike Iran on Good Friday is supposed to be some all encompassing indictment against the administration. When it comes and goes without any conflict, nobody will say, "I overreacted". No, the closest we'll probably come to that is a "Thank God that even Bush isn't THAT evil".
Chris-2-4 | 04.02.07 - 1:36 pm | #

Folks, anyone in the service who tells you when we will be attacking anyone is either:

a) Making it up.

b) A criminal.

I was working in the CENTCOM headquarters before OEF kicked off, and most of us did not know when it was going down. Same for OIF. Execute times are very, very closely held. The only units where it gets spread somewhat broadly are the ones that will have to cross, or shoot something across, the line of departure, and they are told close enough to H-hour that they will have very little opportunity to tell anybody else.
Ed the Roman | 04.02.07 - 1:55 pm | #

Or this could all be a diplomatic move. Put pressure on Iran by letting the Russians rattle our sabre for us.
Francois | 04.02.07 - 2:29 pm | #

Before the first Iraq war Russian military intelligence predicted that the US will win, but that the victory will be costly in terms of casualties. They were embarrassed by how wrong they were. They pretty much predicted the same thing the second time around: the US will win, but it will take plenty of American casualties and many weeks of fighting to topple Saddam. Wrong again. So my opinion of Russian military intelligence is not very high.

(BTW, their predictions had nothing to do with the post-Saddam insurgency.)
Phil | 04.02.07 - 3:53 pm | #

"Before the first Iraq war Russian military intelligence predicted that the US will win, but that the victory will be costly in terms of casualties. They were embarrassed by how wrong they were. They pretty much predicted the same thing the second time around: the US will win, but it will take plenty of American casualties and many weeks of fighting to topple Saddam. Wrong again. So my opinion of Russian military intelligence is not very high."

Who predicted that Iraq would be a post-war pushover?

I spoke with some Soviet military officers in Moscow before the first Gulf War. What I heard was pretty damn interesting, details aside, and what they said sounds pretty damn relevant even now.
Pavel Chichikov | Homepage | 04.02.07 - 7:51 pm | #

I had absolutely no visibility of Soviet intelligence pre-GWI, and almost none of Russian intel prior to OIF. So I don't know.

I know that their friendship is alloyed.
Ed the Roman | 04.03.07 - 7:14 am | #

Pavel
"I spoke with some Soviet military officers in Moscow before the first Gulf War. What I heard was pretty damn interesting, details aside, and what they said sounds pretty damn relevant even now."

Such as?
ShortRound | 04.03.07 - 9:11 am | #

Pavel,

I'm not sure I understand your question. American intelligence certainly lost a lot of credibility lately, but I was referring to Russian not American intelligence. Before the First Gulf War Soviet intelligence predicted that the US will have a much tougher time in defeating Saddam Hussein. They pretty much repeated their prediction the second time around. Wrong again. They didn't expect that Saddam's regime was going to collapse so quickly. So, as far the Persian Gulf area, the Russians do not have a good track record either. Of course, I'm only privy to what they publicly stated--not their secret stuff. But it's significant that they were so wrong in their public predictions.

Once again, I'm not talking about the post-Saddam insurgency. I don't know whether the Russians predicted the current difficulties, perhaps they did. But then many experts in the US and elsewhere also predicted many of the difficulties that the US has faced after the toppling of Saddam. Too bad the administration ignored all those warnings.
Phil | 04.04.07 - 12:06 pm | #