I had received an email from the Crawford Peace House (reprint posted on jobsanger) about a Naval build-up in the Persian Gulf. The email is from a report by the DEBKAfile.

the Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group steamed into the Persian Gulf to join the US naval, air and marine concentration piling up opposite Iran's shores. It consists of the amphibious transport dock USS Nashville, the guided-missile destroyers USS Cole and USS Bulkeley, the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea, the attack submarine USS Albuquerque, and the dock landing ship USS Whidbey Island.

DEBKAfile mentions that Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) will be joining two other "strike groups," the USS Eisenhower and the USS Enterprise in Persian Gulf by Oct 21, which was yesterday. Therefore, I did a little checking around considering, since, this Administration and their minions are good at spinning their kind of information to make progressives look bad. What did I find? It is all true.

It seems Iwo Jima ESG began training in Kuwait since Oct 1, according to Stars & Stripes. The marines and sailors who are deployed with the Iwo Jima were there for about a months worth of training. According to S&S, the strike group will be deployed for six-months. The strike group also includes the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit from Camp Lejeune, NC, as well as supporting units from Beach Master Unit 2, Assault Craft Unit 4, and Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 26 at Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, Little Creek, Va.

Some have suggested that the timing of these "strike forces" may be the October surprise people have been waiting for to occur. If an attack were carried out how much of an influence, would it have on the outcome of the November congressional election where Republicans are current on the ropes? Back in the September, according to Dave Lindorff in his article, "War Signals?" in The Nation magazine there were reports that several angry naval officers within the Eisenhower Strike Group have contacted antiwar retired officers, such as Air Force Col. Sam Gardiner from Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, that their ships are being sent to launch a military attack against Iran.

Colonel Gardiner, who has taught military strategy at the National War College, says that the carrier deployment and a scheduled Persian Gulf arrival date of October 21 is "very important evidence" of war planning. He says, "I know that some naval forces have already received 'prepare to deploy orders' [PTDOs], which have set the date for being ready to go as October 1. Given that it would take about from October 2 to October 21 to get those forces to the Gulf region, that looks about like the date" of any possible military action against Iran. (A PTDO means that all crews should be at their stations, and ships and planes should be ready to go, by a certain date--in this case, reportedly, October 1.) Gardiner notes, "You cannot issue a PTDO and then stay ready for very long. It's a very significant order, and it's not done as a training exercise." This point was also made in the Time article [What Would War Look Like?].

This is the strange part, the Eisenhower had been in port at the Naval Station Norfolk for 6-years, but on October 3 it received orders to depart to relieve the USS Enterprise and three other Norfolk-based ships, but it doesn't seem possible if the Enterprise is suppose to be part of the two "strike forces."

Lindorff also mentions that the Eisenhower is considered a nuclear aircraft carrier. The idea behind this is to bomb Iran's nuclear sites its cruise missiles. If so, then one is the military is planning on using it's nuclear bomb "Divine Strake", which is "specially designed" for use on Iran.

Divine Strake is a 700-ton bunker-buster style bomb that is designed to explode above a tunnel structure. The test's objectives are to study ground shock effects on deeply buried tunnel structures and to study the airblast produced by a buried charge and its modification as it propagates over the local terrain.

Divine Strake is designed to be a nuclear bunker buster is that is deeply buried, such as Iran's nuclear facilities. It was suppose to be tested, but it was reported that the Defense Department decided to delay testing "indefinitely." It was later reported by Associated Press that testing was rescheduled for Sept over the Nevada Test Site. However, in August, the Louisville Courier Journal reported that DoD was considering testing it over a Southern Indiana quarry.

One question we all have to take serious, how far is the US willing to go knowing that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez already threaten to cut off oil supplies to the US if the US decided to attack Iran.

During a visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mr Chavez warned the world of dire consequences if his ally was attacked by the US.

Mr Chavez has threatened to cut off oil supplies to the US if provoked.

This, he explained, on top of Iran shutting off its oil exports, could send oil prices soaring to well above $100 a barrel.

Washington is using Iran only to exaggerate fears about a possible nuclear attack, but this is just another attempt to extend US hegemony. How far is the US willing to continue to put the US in danger? Is this really worth it?