Wolf! WOLF!

Yes, I admit it. Those of us who have spent the past couple of years decrying a planned war against Iran resemble the boy who cried wolf. But don't forget your Aesop: The wolf was real and he did appear, red in tooth and claw.

Many recent news stories convey an unmistakable lupine stench. Here's Marjorie Cohn, of Common Dreams:

The Sunday Times of London is reporting that the Pentagon has plans for three days of massive air strikes against 1,200 targets in Iran. Last week, Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, told a meeting of The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal, that the military did not intend to carry out “pinprick strikes” against Iranian nuclear facilities. He said, “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military.”

Cohn goes on to suggest that Joe Lieberman will replace Gonzo. I disagree. Joe can do more mischief in his Senate seat, and I'm not sure whether the Bushites would trust any non-Republican -- even Lieberman -- to protect their mob.

David Swanson needs no ESP to foresee the outcome of a strike against Iran:

The White House has made clear it is seriously considering attacking Iran with massive bombing aimed at destroying the nation's military and changing its government. Iran will certainly retaliate. If attacked, and possibly even if not attacked, Israel will join in the fighting. The resistance in Iraq will intensify dramatically. Controlling the oil of Iran and Iraq will be out of the question short of thorough genocide. Anti-American furor will sweep the Muslim world. The nuclear nation of Pakistan will be a prime target for an Islamic revolution.

At times, I've wondered if (for Lord-knows-what reason) the neocons want Al Qaeda to control Pakistan. How else to explain the "permitted" evacuation of Osama and the boys to that country? How else to explain the tolerant attitude toward A.Q. Khan?

Right-wing lawyer Jack Goldsmith has written a book outlining the administration's abuses of power. He ties FISA to the planned Iran strike:

Goldsmith] shared the White House's concern that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act might prevent wiretaps on international calls involving terrorists. But Goldsmith deplored the way the White House tried to fix the problem, which was highly contemptuous of Congress and the courts. "We're one bomb away from getting rid of that obnoxious [FISA] court," Goldsmith recalls Addington telling him in February 2004.

The reference goes, of course, to Cheney's top aide David Addington.

You've probably already read this bit from Josh Marshall. Consider it again:

For the moment, however, my attention is fixed on one of those 'hints', Reuel Marc Gerecht's piece in the current Newsweek, in which he argues that war with Iran is most likely to come not because of Bush-Cheney warmongering or a breakdown in negotiations but rather "an Iranian provocation."

It is worth stepping back for a moment to savor this claim in its full flavor. Clearly, this must be the kind of 'provocation' comparatively weak states again and again through history seem to make against extremely powerful states -- just before the latter provides a thorough beating to the former. One can of course think of various examples over the decades and centuries.

One need not read between the lines; Marshall clearly believes that a staged provocation is possible and even likely.

This view is conspiracy stuff. It also happens to be, in my opinion, perfectly sensisble. Still, consider the strangeness of this tableau -- Josh freaking Marshall is now expressing the sort of sentiment which, two years ago, would have been relegated to a semi-scurrilous blog like Cannonfire. Four years ago, only the ultra-scurrilous Alex Jones would have talked this way.

Only Bush and Cheney could make the most maniacal of their critics seem prophetic.