Scott Ritter said in a previous article that the US will be ready to start bombing Iran in June 2005, if Bush orders it.
He points out "that no one in the American media took it upon themselves to confront the President or his Secretary of State about the June 2005 date, or for that matter the October 2004 review by the President of military plans to attack Iran in June 2005."

Late last year, in the aftermath of the 2004 Presidential election, I was contacted by someone close to the Bush administration about the situation in Iraq.
There was a growing concern inside the Bush administration, this source said, about the direction the occupation was
going.
The Bush administration was keen on achieving some semblance of stability in Iraq before June 2005, I was told.
When I asked why that date, the source dropped the bombshell: because that was when the Pentagon was told to be prepared to launch a massive aerial attack against Iran, Iraq's neighbour to the east, in order to destroy the
Iranian nuclear programme.

The US never had any valid reason for invading, killing, imprisoning and torturing Iraqis. Even less reason today, as more and more US lies become further exposed as lies the Bush Administration created to justify war. Yet the US goes on piling up its record of horrible war crimes and pledging to continue and do more of these same crimes, both to the Iraqis and to others. They justify all crimes under the umbrella of "war on terrorism". Are Americans that dumbed down, that they actually believe this transparent series of lies?

A newly released memo shows that US General Ricardo Sanchez authorized illegal interrogation techniques in Iraq just months before the Abu Ghraib abuses. Colin Powell, meanwhile, regrets misinforming the UN about Iraq WMDs.
Also, imagine being typecast as Hitler.
Iraq: New Memo from Abu Ghraib, New Words from Powell

Step by step, Bush's 'US' is building its new Empire
Every nation not supportive of the continuing US crusade is a possible candidate for US assault.
Evan documents the insane doctrines of pre-emptive US war against anyone, anytime, anywhere the US unilaterally decides to attack. War policies are decided by a small coterie of un-elected, psychopathic neocons selected by President Bush. He has promoted them to the highest ranks of the US government. Bush does not listen to any criticism or alternative advice. They have been planning war against Iraq and other states for many years - long before the 9/11 attack.

Pentagon Confirms That Unilateral Preemptive Strikes Are Now US Policy
The Pentagon has released a new strategic plan, blandly titled "The National Defense Strategy of the United States of America," that explicitly endorses unilateral preemptive strikes.
This is yet another indication that the Bush administration is dramatically accelerating away from longstanding doctrines that are upheld by both general international law and seemingly-important transatlantic coalitions like NATO.

But these war crimes are only a beginning. Bush has threatened to widen the war to Iran and Syria. The famous anti-war campaigner, Dr Helen Caldicott says the re-election of Bush means endless wars and the probable use of nuclear weapons as Bush pursues his imperial crusade under the camouflage of “war on terror”
Nelson Mandella calls Bush the most dangerous man in the world. This madman and his crackpot neoconservative regime must be stopped before they destroy the world

Chossudovsky is one of the world's leading analysts of US foreign and military policies.
The following paper proves that. His forte is determining where the US is really headed, and what strategy it intends to use to get there. He does not cover the potential dire consequences of US strategy, at least in this article.
But the consequences are huge. We are looking at the rapid militarization of US society as a whole, and harnessing the resources of the state and the people, to achieve bizarre, even paranoid, and exceedingly dangerous military objectives.

The Pentagon has released the summary of a top secret Pentagon document, which sketches America's agenda for global military domination.
This redirection of America's military strategy seems to have passed virtually unnoticed. With the exception of The Wall Street Journal (see below in annex), not a word has been mentioned in the US media.
There has been no press coverage concerning this mysterious military blueprint. The latter outlines, according to the Wall Street Journal, America's global military design which consists in "enhancing U.S. influence around the world", through increased troop deployments and a massive buildup of America's advanced weapons systems.

P.R. expert John Stauber and Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Laurie Garrett comment on the Times' front page investigation of the 'fake news' scandals.
The article reports that at least 20 federal agencies – including the Defense Department and the Census Bureau – have distributed hundreds of television news segments in the past four years. Many were then broadcast on local stations without crediting the government as the source of the information.
More Stories by Amy Goodman

P.R. expert John Stauber and Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Laurie Garrett comment on the Times' front page investigation of the 'fake news' scandals.
Editor's note: The following is an edited transcript of a Democracy Now! interview with PRwatch.org's John Stauber and Pulitzer-winning reporter Laurie Garrett. For the full transcript go to Democracy Now!
More Stories by Amy Goodman

Bush believes he is inspired by God, talks to God, and that whatever he does is blessed by God. This supposedly includes any torture and murder that Bush chooses to do. Of course Bush admits nothing and denies everything, so manages to fool enough Americans to continue to get public support... As the Red Cross points out, most of the victims are innocent and have no links with the so-called ‘terrorists’.

In the heady months after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the chickenhawks of the Bush Regime were eager to flash their tough-guy cojones to the world. Led by the former prep-school cheerleader in the Oval Office, swaggering Bushists openly bragged of "kicking ass" with macho tactics like torture and "extraordinary rendition."

The media, even in NZ, do not mention Bush's illegal invasion based on lies and the killing of over 100,000 people in his pursuit of oil and control of Iraq. The corporate media do not draw attention to the fact that Bush and his administration have committed multiple war crimes and should be standing trial at the World Court at The Hague. The more Bush commits war crimes, the more enthusiastic the media becomes about relaying pro-Bush war propaganda.

.......And besides, someone has to keep the press honest. In recent weeks Krugman's column has focused heavily on the flaws in the president's Social Security proposal—flaws the media have downplayed, he says, because the press seems "extremely hostile to Social Security as it is" and "really buys into the notion of a crisis."
This might be because Social Security is an issue that is clearly important but that few in the media really understand. To the press, "it became a badge," Krugman says. "You needed to learn about two paragraphs of stuff and then you could go on a panel and sound like a grave, serious person concerned about the problems of the United States."

In February 2003 - a few weeks before the invasion of Iraq - President George W. Bush declared that "[r]ebuilding Iraq will require a sustained commitment from many nations, including our own: we will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, and not a day more. America has made and kept this kind of commitment before - in the peace that followed a world war."
However, Bush never addressed the question of cost. From the start, the administration has been, and continues to be, evasive about the costs of war in Iraq. But these costs cannot be ignored and must be weighed by the American public, particularly taxpayers, to determine whether they are willing to pay the price and make the necessary sacrifices to create a stable and peaceful democracy in Iraq - if that goal can be achieved at all.

Dr Roberts analysis is brilliant and spells out the true situation briefly and with clarity. However I don't think the neocon's want to "remake the Middle East in the American image". I think they want to make a barbarous wasteland and call it "freedom and democracy" in order to fool Americans into giving support for the slaughter.
I agree that the neocons want "to provoke a Pearl Harbour" and "may orchestrate a scenario that will suck the US into a wider war". That certainly coincides with my analysis based on years of studying the situation.

President Bush's invasion has turned Iraq into a recruiting and training ground for anti-U.S. terrorists, according to CIA Director Porter Goss in testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Feb. 16. Goss' report was supported by Vice Admiral Lowell Jacoby, director of the the Defense Intelligence Agency. Jacoby told the committee that "our policies in the Middle East fuel Islamic resentment." The Iraq insurgency, Jacoby reported, has grown "in size and complexity over the past year" with daily attacks increasing 240 percent.
The situation, in other words, is out of control. One hundred fifty thousand American troops are tied down by a few thousand lightly armed insurgents. The recent Iraq election was won by Shi'ites allied with Iran. U.S. casualties continue to mount, and our troops can seldom tell friend from foe.
Why isn't Bush looking for a way out of the greatest strategic blunder in American history? Why, instead, are Bush and his government doing all they can to spread the conflict into Syria and Iran?

Israel Air Force Commander-in-Chief Major General Eliezer Shakedi said Monday that Israel must be prepared for an air strike on Iran in light of its nuclear activity.
But in a meeting with reporters, Shakedi wouldn't say whether he thought Israel was capable of carrying out such a mission alone, as it did when it bombed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor near Baghdad in 1981.
When asked whether Israel has a plan for the Iranian nuclear program, Shakedi replied, "You know that for obvious reasons, I won't say even a word."

How the US creates a new dependant market and destroys a local industry that has proven successful methods, - almost like a new form of economic enslavement, is well described in the following article by Jeremy Smith.
The US created a very rich bonanza for US construction corporations by massive bombing of Iraq before they illegally invaded it. Chosen US corporations, who support Bush, were then given contracts to rebuild it. Similarly US military corporations who supply materials and food to US troops, make weapons, supply military 'contracted' personnel to act as US mercenaries etc, are given a vested interest in the Iraq war and colonial occupation.

Although this article below was written in 2003, it does illuminate some of the mysteries of why so many Americans seem to be taken in, and echo, Bush lies and why so many seem to deny the very threatening realities that confront them every day....

....I realise that to many readers this will seem too bizarre to be possible. If so, remember that our supposedly ‘sane’ global society has lived on the brink of a nuclear self-annihilation for 60 years and, in spite of the end of the cold war, continues to work on the means to bring this about. Millions of people know that a nuclear holocaust has almost happened on several occasions, but they do nothing to prevent it or try and change the situation.. It’s a huge industry employing millions of people and costing trillions of dollars. Many people have learned to accept this situation as necessary for global security reasons, or as part of the human environment. The authors say “get smart, and then we will reclaim our Republic.”

US Warns about Nuclear Proliferation, While It Proliferates

"The Energy Department now spends 35% more on the US nuclear arsenal each year than it did between 1948 and 1991(when it spent the equivalent of $4.2 billion annually in current dollars) The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) "plans to increase spending on the US arsenal to $7.6 billion by 2009"
"Even the Pentagon's own Defence Science Board has come round to the view that there is no need to rebuild large numbers of high yield "legacy" nuclear weapons to support a credible and effective deterrence policy."

US Spending Twice as Much on Nukes as 10 Years Ago

Guess What? We're Spending Twice As Much

Now on Nuclear Weapons Than We Did Ten Years Ago
Experts have nodded approvingly at President Bush’s program for non-proliferation enforcement. Leaders of all the nuclear nations agree—for the record—that the nuclear ogre must be brought under control.
But here’s the problem. Any nation that might be inclined to live by the President’s nuclear control words has to be highly unsettled by his deeds.

US EXPANDS THREAT TO OTHER STATES

StratCom Will Oversee WMD Efforts

Dropping in on the Apocalypse

Xtreme Weather and the Planet's "Human Carrying Capacity"
"The countdown to climate-change catastrophe is spelt out by a task force of senior politicians, business leaders and academics from around the world -- and it is remarkably brief. In as little as 10 years, or even less, their report indicates, the point of no return with global warming may have been reached… And it breaks new ground by putting a figure -- for the first time in such a high-level document -- on the danger point of global warming, that is, the temperature rise beyond which the world would be irretrievably committed to disastrous changes. These could include widespread agricultural failure, water shortages and major droughts, increased disease, sea-level rise and the death of forests -- with the added possibility of abrupt catastrophic events such as 'runaway' global warming, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet, or the switching-off of the Gulf Stream.

U.S. Redesigning Atomic Weapons

U.S.-Israel plan to strike Irans nuclear sites finalized

Experts from the U.S. Defense Department, the Pentagon and Israel have put final touches to a plan to launch a military strike targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, experts at the European Commission based in Brussels, revealed on Sunday.

Space Wars Dream - Will It Fizzle Out Again?

. . . . In this deadly nuclear gamesmanship, would the present or a future US administration ever decide to make a surprise massive first nuclear strike against Russia, China or some other state, taking a calculated risk that they can destroy the retaliatory power of their chosen enemy?

Star Wars Faces a Budget Hit

Unreliability is just one reason why funding is being cut.
The other is the changing nature of potential threats to U.S. security.

Of Militarism, Fascism, War And National Consciousness: