Counting spoons & the dogs of war.

The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons. --Ralph Waldo Emerson

The louder the Bush administration declares that it is not planning to launch a war against Iran, the more certain it appears that it is planning precisely that.

The denials, which have been coming fast and furious for weeks, fly in the face of actions, which include a huge buildup of U.S. carrier groups in the region.

In a statement issued on February 23, the Pentagon said, "The United States is not planning to go to war with Iran. To suggest anything to the contrary is simply wrong, misleading and mischievous."

"The United States has been very clear with respect to its concerns regarding specific Iranian government activities," the statement continued. "The president has repeatedly stated publicly that this country is going to work with allies in the region to address those concerns through diplomatic efforts."

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on February 15: "We are not, you know, for the umpteenth time, we are not looking for an excuse to go to war with Iran. We are not planning a war with Iran."

"We are not planning offensive military operations against Iran," said Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns.

In a widely reported statement in early February, General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared during a trip to Australia and Indonesia that there is "zero chance" of the United States going to war against Iran. Later, during a Senate hearing, General Pace was asked by Sen. Robert Byrd whether it was true that the Pentagon was planning air strikes against Iran.

"It is not true," Pace replied.

"Categorically?" Byrd pressed.

"Categorically, sir," Pace said.

Well, then, it must be true; America is not going to war against Iran. Right? After all, our leaders would not lie to us, would they? Besides, the Bush administration, in what appears to be a major turnabout, has agreed to join in the Iraq-sponsored "neighbors meeting" with Iran and Syria in Baghdad.

The Iraqi government announced that it was preparing the conference for mid-March, and that invitees include members of the Arab League and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: the United States, Britain, France, China, and Russia. A follow-up meeting involving the countries' foreign ministers--which Secretary of State Rice reportedly will attend--is also being planned, perhaps as soon as early April.

But domestic critics of the administration, not to mention anti-U.S. elements in the Middle East, are not delusional when they suggest (or openly accuse) that these diplomatic initiatives are mere cover for an imminent military attack on Iran. Over the past several months, the U.S. Navy has concentrated an extraordinary number of vessels in the Persian Gulf-Mediterranean Sea-Arabian Sea region--far more than are needed for diplomacy. Two carrier groups, the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower and the USS John C. Stennis, have been operating off Iran. The USS Nimitz carrier group is headed to the area, ostensibly to replace the USS Eisenhower. But there is good reason to suspect that rather than replace the Eisenhower, the plan may actually be for it to join the gathering firepower, which also includes two U.S. naval Expeditionary Strike Forces.

With President Bush and the Iraq War showing very badly in the polls, and with Congress now in Democratic hands, the Bush War Room knows it has no support for vastly expanding the war with an unprovoked attack on Iran. But the key word is "unprovoked." By putting so many of our naval assets into the Persian "hot zone," is the president gambling (or guaranteeing?) that a suitable provocation will soon eventuate?

Many people are asking that question, and many more should be asking it, especially in light of recent revelations that prior to the invasion of Iraq President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair discussed provocations that were being planned to draw Saddam Hussein into firing the first shot.

Blair adviser David Manning's minutes of the January 2003 meeting indicate Bush stated, "The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach."

Are similar plans in the works for a provocation with Iran? If not a specific planned provocation, the concentration of our military assets in the region greatly increases the odds for an opportunistic incident that will launch the U.S.-Iran War that the current White House is so ardently pursuing. Will we soon see another Gulf of Tonkin? Another USS Cole?

If and when (God forbid) such an inciting incident occurs, then we know that immediately the warmongers will spring to action, and like Julius Caesar "ranging for revenge, / With Ate by his side come hot from hell, / Shall in these confines with a monarch's voice, / cry 'Havoc,' and let slip the dogs of war."