Joe Klein actually gets something right. Just who is sending those powerful bombs to Iraq is murky and, based on the organizations in Iran, not likely the official government.
Not surprisingly considering this is just a pretext for a US attack on Iran, the secret anonymous briefing was lying about the number of US soldiers killed by the bombs as Juan Cole shows here and here.
Of course, the Shiite dominated Iraqi government doesn't support the charges against Iran either but surprisingly neither does our top general. Not a surprise - Iran denies charges, on primetime US TV.
Why now? The British and our military has been reporting on these Iranian IEDs for over a year. The answer appears to be to gin up support for military strikes on Iran in advance of the
Here is the anonymous PowerPoint presentation given to reporters, note the lack of specifics.
Are we prepared to fight three wars at once? The NIE calls it four elements of a civil war already without Iran, so by my count an attack on Iran would be five. "One is Shia on Shia, principally in the south; the second is sectarian conflict, principally in Baghdad, but not solely; third is the insurgency; and fourth is al Qaeda, and al Qaeda is attacking, at times, all of those targets," Gates said.
Tom Engelhardt calls the coming attack Bush-Cheney's Thelma and Louise solution. I stated last year a third carrier group, combined with the two amphib carriers, is the sign of the coming attack with disastrous consequences.