Is Bush Staging Nukes for Iran?

Thursday, September 6th, 2007 in News, Iran, Nukes by Eric Garris| Comment |

That is the question Larry Johnson asks over at TPMCafe. Johnson is a former counter-terrorism official with the CIA and the State Department.

Johnson questions the official story about the nukes being mistakenly flown over the US. A retired B-52 pilot reminds him that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site. Barksdale AFB is being used as a jumping off point for Mideast operations.

Johnson is certain that the pilots of this plane did not just make a last minute decision to strap on some nukes and take them for a joy ride. Johnson asks: Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations? Johnsons pilot friend believes that someone on the inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing with nukes. That is something else.

Johnson wonders: Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran?

I certainly hope that is the case. We need responsible officers that are unwilling to let our leaders get away with dragging us closer to war.

UPDATE: The Military Times newspapers, who originally broke the story leaked by unnamed military officers, reports that the squadron commander has been relieved of duty following investigation. The papers also reported that there were six, rather than five, nuclear weapons that were transported across the country.

Yeah

[smittyoneeach]

I usually flatter myself that I have a good gut instinct for where things are going, but I have to confess this one has me baffled.
There seems no motivation to move these munitions in the first place--they could fly a B-2 from essentially anywhere and Do The Deed.
Given that the decision is made, and revealed to be a gaffe, why publicize the boo-boo? These are people that could concoct a reason with little effort to classify all of the details, rightly or wrongly.
Is it a telegram to Tehran? Is it eviden

PNAC

[zogger]

The project for a new american century. They outlined exactly what they were about, what they were going to do, starting with iraq and saddam, and have been following the plan. They want in permanently in the middle east, and are out for total regime change all over there to much better puppets or outright military rule, it won't matter, they want cowed domesticated natives.. The two main goals are grab all the oil, and make the mideast totally safe for israel. Side effects are getting to institute a domest

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

First I've heard of PNAC, though I've seen Kristol on the talking head circuit.
They haven't even got an RSS feed on their website.

new world order PNAC goons "embedded" inside the DOD and executive branch.

Maybe, but I have more respect for http://www.atr.org/ [atr.org] than PNAC. Note the TLA URL.

Re:

[Captain Splendid]

First I've heard of PNAC

I seriously hope you're joking, otherwise get the fuck out of your cave.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I've certainly heard of the Neo-con movement, but I don't recall hearing of the PNAC as an organization, or visiting their site. They haven't even got an RSS feed for god's sake. Cave, indeed.

Re:

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

http://www.newamericancentury.org/ [newamericancentury.org]

Especially:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf [newamericancentury.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century [wikipedia.org]

Especially:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#Rebuilding_America.27s_Defenses [wikipedia.org]

And
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_New_American_Century [sourcewatch.org]

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Wikipedia link says it all. I stand educated.
OTOH, as someone who has taken several classes from the Naval War College, let me throw you some thought-bait of broader scope that just the global war on terror.
Since the end of the Second World War, the US has been the military leader of the free world.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has been pretty much the military leader of the world.
This has meant that global economic military spending is significantly lower than it would be without a pax am

saddam

[zogger]

Saddam was tolerated and supported by the establishment for years, even going into kuwait,(he was given a tacit understanding that it would be OK because kuwait had been slant drilling and stealing iraqi oil under the border) until he sacked the bank and heisted the gold there. The NWO doesn't like stuff like that, central banks are the holy of holies. The second time he was tolerated (more or less, along with daily small scale bombing and no fly zone action)until he switched to insisting on euros instead o

Holy of holies

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

That's right.

Where does that term originate from? Who owns the banks? Why was Israel created?

(Hint on the third question: it wasn't to create a home for "a people without a land" - that is mere pretext.)