DID BUSH AND CHENEY TRY TO USE THE IRANIAN SEIZURE OF BRITISH NAVAL PERSONNEL TO PROVOKE WAR?

I haven't found anything to add to the news about the 15 British boys and girls military service members captured-- in waters long the subject of dispute between Iran and Iraq-- and then released. However, a friend of mine from London called this morning with an interesting point. She mentioned that there was a reason Tony Blair thanked everyone on the face of the planet for helping to secure the release of the British seamen and marines except for two: Bush and Cheney.

While Syria and Russia and China and Pakistan were all trying to ease tensions and work for a peaceful solution, Bush seemed to go out of his way to anger the Iranians and even to make it difficult for them to back out of the crisis gracefully. "I think they wanted to turn it into a casus belli so they could drop some bombs on Iran," my friend told me. It doesn't sound far-fetched. But is it true?

I suppose it will come out in the wash eventually-- or not-- but we do have one solid thing to go by. Blair went bonkers when Bush and Cheney provocatively referred to the British servicemembers as "hostages." My friend tells me that in Britain that was seen as a deliberate attempt by the Bush Regime to ratchet up the rhetoric just as Blair was trying to ratchet it down. "Blair wanted the safe return of the sailors. Bush wanted to start a war with Iran," is what some in London are saying. They already have a little war going in southwest Iran by financing a gang of bandit drug dealers, nothing really serious but enough to keep Iran off balance a little. This week Brian Ross of ABC News reported on the so-called Jundullah, a shadowy group based in Pakistan and illegally finaced through third parties, not by the CIA but by Cheney's office.


As more starts to leak out about what the naval troops were really up to and what the Iranians had in mind and what went on between the Brits and the Iranians, perhaps we'll learn more about what many Europeans are calling Bush's "unhelpful attitude." Or maybe we'll just hear the twisted propaganda of right-wing war mongers like Charles Krauthammer braying away in the background for more war, war that the Bush Regime is more than capable of starting by "accident."


UPDATE: WHAT DID I TELL YOU? IT'S COMING OUT NOW

Sure enough, tomorrow's Guardian has the first story about how Bush and Cheney wanted to escalate the crisis into miltary action.

The British declined the offer and said the US could calm the situation by staying out of it. London also asked the US to tone down military exercises that were already under way in the Gulf. Three days before the capture of the 15 Britons , a second carrier group arrived having been ordered there by president George Bush in January. The aim was to add to pressure on Iran over its nuclear programme and alleged operations inside Iraq against coalition forces.

At the request of the British, the two US carrier groups, totalling 40 ships plus aircraft, modified their exercises to make them less confrontational.

The British government also asked the US administration from Mr Bush down to be cautious in its use of rhetoric, which was relatively restrained throughout.

UPDATE: NEOCON BILL KRISTOL IS NOT AN OFFICIAL MEMBER OF THE BUSH INNER CIRCLE, BUT HE SURE THINKS LIKE THEM... ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO ATTACKING IRAN

And this morning Kristol was at it again, not rejoicing that the 15 British sailors and marines were returned peacefully after negotiations, but spewing out the poisonous Cheney line that we should have used the opportunity to bomb Iran.