WASHINGTON (AFP) - The administration of President George W. Bush is planning a massive bombing campaign against Iran, including use of bunker-buster nuclear bombs to destroy a key Iranian suspected nuclear weapons facility, The New Yorker magazine has reported in its April 17 issue.

The article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said that Bush and others in the White House have come to view Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a potential Adolf Hitler.

"That's the name they're using," the report quoted a former senior intelligence official as saying.

A senior unnamed Pentagon adviser is quoted in the article as saying that "this White House believes that the only way to solve the problem is to change the power structure in Iran, and that means war."

The former intelligence officials depicts planning as "enormous," "hectic" and "operational," Hersh writes.

One former defense official said the military planning was premised on a belief that "a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government," The New Yorker pointed out.

In recent weeks, the president has quietly initiated a series of talks on plans for Iran with a few key senators and members of the House of Representatives, including at least one Democrat, the report said.
One of the options under consideration involves the possible use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, to insure the destruction of Iran's main centrifuge plant at Natanz, Hersh writes.

But the former senior intelligence official said the attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings inside the military, and some officers have talked about resigning after an attempt to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans in Iran failed, according to the report.

"There are very strong sentiments within the military against brandishing nuclear weapons against other countries," the magazine quotes the Pentagon adviser as saying.

The adviser warned that bombing Iran could provoke "a chain reaction" of attacks on American facilities and citizens throughout the world and might also reignite Hezbollah.

"If we go, the southern half of Iraq will light up like a candle," the adviser is quoted as telling The New Yorker.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060408/wl_mideast_afp/usirannuclearmilitary_060408061934;_ylt=Apsf7ZiSNV D1bQy5XbkPMM1Sw60A;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJV RPUCUl

Never happen. The economic backlash would be overwhelming.

Originally Posted by bulldogg

Never happen. The economic backlash would be overwhelming.

It never happens and it is impossible, but the leftist author (Seymour Hersh) wants to make the US military look like war criminals

Isn't that always the case? People will try to make a name for themselves no matter how they manage to accomplish it.

A first strike Nuclear attack is unlikely to happen. The International community would start questioning America's policy towards Nuclear Arsenal.

The International community would start questioning America's policy towards Nuclear Arsenal.

so what?

If this thread: U.S-India deal threatens global nuclear balance is any indication then they may start to question the US anyway.

Originally Posted by Rabs

so what?

I'm not going to repeat myself.

U.S-India deal threatens global nuclear balance

If the US-India nuclear deal goes through, it will further encourage Iran pursue to develop Nuclear weapons as a deterrent. If Iran produces Nuclear weapons, compellence for the US have failed regardless if physical or non-physical action is taken.

States build nuclear weapons because of its cheap and robust form of defense and deterrence.

If a state uses nuclear weapons, the NPT is scrapped and nuclear powers will once again engage in a Nuclear Arms Race.

Nah, the yanks wouldn't use nukes would they?????
The repacusions would be huge.

No, the "yanks" would not use Nukes. It is asinine to even consider it.