The Carnifex Waves His Bloody Knife At Iran

I owe Rob Payne @ Dead Horse whatever version of crow eating (ew, cannibalism) most appropriately demonstrates my failure to call this one correctly.

Seems that Stanlieus Carnifex and the New MacArthur really, really want more black bag money for the Pentagon's semi-secret terrorism campaign in Iran:

"KABUL, Afghanistan — The commander of NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan said Sunday there is 'clear evidence' that some Taliban fighters have trained in Iran.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal told reporters in the Afghan capital that Iran - Afghanistan's western neighbor - has generally assisted the Afghan government in fighting the insurgent group.

'There is, however, clear evidence of Iranian activity - in some cases providing weaponry and training to the Taliban - that is inappropriate,' he said. McChrystal said NATO forces are working to stop both the training and the weapons trafficking.

Last month, McChrystal said there were indications that Taliban were training in Iran, but not very many and not in a way that it appeared it was part of an Iranian government policy. He did not give details on how many people have trained in Iran at Sunday's news conference."

Source.

I really, really would have taken the odds on using North Korea as a distraction from Obama's oil woes in the Gulf of Mexico. But, I guess Imperial Barack and the General Staff need something in Iran.

I wonder what.

See also, this:

"A military strike on Iranian military bases, airports, bridges, railroad stations and other key infrastructure could lead Iran to suspend its nuclear arms program, according to a paper that came out last week in a US Army publication.

Titled 'Can a Nuclear-Armed Iran Be Deterred?' the article, which appeared in the current edition of Military Review, was written by American-Israeli sociologist and George Washington University professor Amitai Etzioni.

Attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities might not be effective, the Palmach veteran and Hebrew University alumnus writes, since, as opponents of such a strike argue, the location of key facilities may not be known, the facilities are well protected, and some are in heavily populated areas and bombing them would cause a great number of civilian casualties.

As a result, he calls for a 'different military option.'

'The basic approach seeks not to degrade Iran’s nuclear capacities (the aim of bombing) but to compel the regime to change its behavior, by causing ever-higher levels of ‘pain,’ Etzioni writes.

Neither Israel nor the United States has ever publicly spoken about the targets that they would bomb if they decide to attack Iran. Most military thinkers have spoken about only targeting nuclear facilities and military sites that could be used by Teheran to retaliate.

Such a strike would come after Iran fails to live up to its international obligations and open up its nuclear to inspections. The next step, Etzioni recommends, would be to bomb non-nuclear military assets such as the headquarters and encampments of the Revolutionary Guard Corps, as well as air defense installations, radar sites, missile sites and navy vessels that could be used to stop the flow of oil to the West.

If this campaign fails, Etzioni recommends bombing dual-use assets such as bridges and railroad stations. If a further tightening of screws is needed, then the attacker could declare Iran a no-fly zone like part of Iraq was even before Operation Iraqi Freedom was launched in 2003."

(emphasis mine)

Source.

Noted "communitarian" Etzioni wants the US and Israel to pound Iran into body parts and DU dust because its leadership might abide by its non-proliferation treaty "[fail] to live up to its...obligations."

h/t Werkshop 

Yay, Western Civilization...