Page 293 - Mass Media, Mass Propoganda Examining American News in the War on Terror

A Game Plan for Infinite War? 283

This revelation leads Ackerman to label a possible attack on Syria as "expressly
counterproductive," rather than flatly illegal, aggressive, and imperial.16
Ackerman's argument about the homegrown nature of Iraqi resistance,
however, is important in that it is reinforced by other reports on the growth of
such forces. As discussed in chapter 5, the "foreign fighters" in which U.S. mili-
tary leaders and many media reports complain are threatening American lives
and entering through Syria only account for an estimated 5 to 10 percent of the
total number of resistance fighters in Iraq. As the Center for Strategic Interna-
tional Studies states, most Iraqi fighters are not foreign terrorists, or "Saddam
loyalists," but actually "members of Sunni Arab Iraqi tribes" who "do not want
to see Mr. Hussein return to power," and are "wary of a Shiite-led govern-
ment."I7

The Iranian "Nuclear Challengen

Iran has long been considered a major obstacle to American dominance in the
Middle East, as many feel it is the most likely state to be targeted by the U.S.
after Iraq. Media reporting has concentrated on this possibility, although to a
limited degree. Long-time investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported in
the Nay Yorker that at least one high level intelligence official in the Bush ad-
ministration verified Iran as the next country in which the U.S. military would
like to attack. A number of possible military strategies were illustrated in
Hersh's reporting, including the "possible authorization of secret commando
groups and other Special Forces units to conduct covert operations against sus-
pected terrorist targets" in Iran, as well as a number of other states.'* Other pre-
ventive first strike options purportedly include reliance on Israel as a proxy force
that may bomb Iranian nuclear facilities, as the Jerusalem Post reported in
March of 2006. The Jerusalem Post summarized: "it is clear that Israel would
have to coordinate with the US forces air control any attempt to fly over Iraq on
the way to Iran, if Israel chooses to attack using the shortest r~ute."'~ As men-
tioned earlier, President Bush has not ruled out the potential of a direct attack by
the U.S. either.
Scholar and strategic analyst Michael Klare suggests that: "Given the im-
mense stress now being placed on U.S. ground forces in Iraq, it is likely that the
Pentagon's favored plan for military action in Iran involves some combination
of air-strikes" and "the use of local Iranian opposition forces."20 Iranian writer
and activist Sarnan Sepehri believes that U.S. policy motives in regards to Iran
are aimed at deterring the rise of a potential competitor with the U.S. and Israel
in the region: "With a population of seventy million, nearly three times that of
Iraq or Saudi Arabia, an educated and technically proficient population, and
sizable armed forces, Iran is the dominant regional power in the Persian Gulf; a
region which sits on top of two-thirds of the world's oil reserves."21 Such a criti-
cal view of the administration's planned attack on Iran has been common
enough in alternative media sources, but is not typically repeated in mainstream
media reporting.