You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Attack on Iran an option: Bush
2006-01-29
US President George W Bush said on Friday that sanctions against Iran were “certainly a real possibility” if Tehran does not do enough to ease fears that it is trying to develop nuclear weapons. “A free world cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon; not just the US, but those of us who value freedom,” Bush told CBS television in an interview. “And that is why our strategy is to present and hold together a united front, to say to the Iranians: Your designs to have a nuclear weapon or your desire to have the capability of making a nuclear weapon is unacceptable.”

Asked whether sanctions would work against Iran, Bush replied: “I have said that is certainly a real possibility.” Asked whether he had reviewed plans for possible military action, Bush said: “I think it’s best I just leave it that all options should be on the table, and the last option is the military option. We’ve got to work hard to exhaust all diplomacy. And that’s what the country is seeing happen,” Bush said.
Posted by:Fred

#5  France can't bring anything to the party and all Germany has to offer would be air bases. Britain can bring moral support and some troops, but an unfortunate fact of the 21st Century is that if anything is to be done, the US has to do it. Everyone else is just along for the ride.
Posted by: RWV   2006-01-29 22:06  

#4  Perfesser, you get 1/3 credit. If the UK is on board, it's a go. At best France is an ally of our enemies. Their opinion counts for nothing. The Germans might get a consult call, but no veto.

I suspect the reality will be that they agree behind closed doors but that they squeal in public for their Muslim minorities. I care much more what Japan, India and Australia think than Germany and France. I suspect most Americans not in the State Department feel the same way.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-01-29 11:02  

#3  "WeÂ’ve got to work hard to exhaust all diplomacy."
Sounds like exhausting it is just part of the overall plan, doesn't it? He didn't say "WeÂ’ve got to solve this through diplomacy." My read between the lines is "WeÂ’ve got to work hard to exhaust all diplomacy... before the winter heating season ends and our attack begins."
Posted by: Darrell   2006-01-29 10:47  

#2  I suppose I disagree with virtually everyone who reads these pages regarding the possibility of conflict with Iran. Donald Rumsfeld, in another context, once remarked that the U.S. was a country of people who, when they see something not working, want to do it themselves. This is particularly true with respect to the EU, which clearly is alarmed by the prospect of a nuclear Iran, but would react badly in response to a unilateral action on our part. Who would blame them? Oil will spike to $150 per barrel in the short run, and Iran ain't going to get the kid-glove treatment that was dealt Iraq and continues to this day. The only way an attack on Iran will occur is if the UK, France, and Germany are 100 percent on board -- unless the nervous nellie mullahs of Iran do something really stupid, like blocking the Straits of Hormuz.
Posted by: Perfessor   2006-01-29 09:49  

#1  Use of rhetoric-bombs aren't in the cards. Something huge is in the works.

The Iranian tyranny organizes "death to America" and "death to Zionism" screamfests, and wants nuclear weapons. I detect a good pretext for major pre-emptive operations.
Posted by: ForkoBonitazumanoid   2006-01-29 03:08  

00:00