'will go to war with Iran before the end of the year'

* via Noise in the comments here where i mentioned the new war in iran, Nafeez Ahmed has a blog. Last week he wrote:

UK Govt Sources Confirm War With Iran Is On

In the last few days, I learned from a credible and informed source that a former senior Labour government Minister, who continues to be well-connected to British military and security officials, confirms that Britain and the United States:

"... will go to war with Iran before the end of the year.""

Larisa also dropped by in the comments (amongst other great comments):

It is not that we are going to nuke Iran over the summer/fall, rather, I am told we will be engaging Iran directly and I think Sam Gardiner's strategy of air strikes is largely supported as the most probable. Air strikes do not mean nukes.

I have reported much on Iran and it has all been thus far supported by reality on the ground and other publications. This is hardly theory.

First remove the concept of elections from this for now, because this administration has an agenda that has nothing to do with Congress.

Then consider this:

Since last year we have been using a terrorist organization, MEK, on the ground in Iran to act as a "disrupting force."

Just in March alone, MEK assassinated 22 Iranian officials, including a governor. We have set of smallish bombs and other "destabilizing" activities there since last year. These actions are prepping the ground for something...but for what?

The OVP has retained the services of Iran Contra arms man, Gorba, to "act as eyes and ears on the ground" to make sure that no "unauthorized" negotiations take place.

We have bypassed the UNSC and approached EU banks directly already.

We have attempted to implicate both Iran/Iraq in a WMD smuggling plot (see my article on this).

The US DOD has created an OSP for Iran called the Iranian Directorate, with the same exact people (minus 2).

The US State Department is funneling large amounts of cash to "opposition" groups in Iran.

These are but a few points and it is impossible to deny that we are actively engaged in regime change already.

But the US does not have the authority or reason to justify an aerial attack on Iran, although we did a great deal of illegal pre-war bombing in Iraq prior to attacking them (see my article).

I and others have said we would need a trigger. The "others" in this scenario are more informed about these issues than you, me, Luke and everyone else put together. The questions now are what the trigger will be, not if there will be an attack.

Sy Hersh and I are the only two journalists staying on this story. Just because there are only two of us, does not make us wrong nor does it mean that others don't see what we are reporting and express concern.

Some reporters wait until something happens, then it is news. I generally agree with that sentiment. But on this issue, waiting to see is negligent, because we know far too much activity is going on for it to simply "pan out."

The election question is not important here, simply because this administration is not running for reelection, and should Dems take control of both chambers or even one, this attack will not be possible.

Regardless of what the American people wake up to, they are powerless because Congress is not doing its job. We can take to the streets, but we won't make a dent of difference. Congress has to act and as you can see, Congress is completely limp at this point.

This administration has an agenda, and they are better served doing things now than during a Dem led Congress.