The Guardian reports that “US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage.” Sources told The Guardian‘s Ewen MacAskill that the military build-up in the Gulf allows “the U.S. to mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before Mr Bush leaves office.”
Neo-conservatives, particularly at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, are urging Mr Bush to open a new front against Iran. So too is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The state department and the Pentagon are opposed, as are Democratic congressmen and the overwhelming majority of Republicans. The sources said Mr Bush had not yet made a decision. The Bush administration insists the military build-up is not offensive but aimed at containing Iran and forcing it to make diplomatic concessions. The aim is to persuade Tehran to curb its suspect nuclear weapons programme and abandon ambitions for regional expansion.
Article continues
——————————————————————————–
——————————————————————————–
Robert Gates, the new US defence secretary, said yesterday: “I don’t know how many times the president, secretary [of state Condoleezza] Rice and I have had to repeat that we have no intention of attacking Iran.”
But Vincent Cannistraro, a Washington-based intelligence analyst, shared the sources’ assessment that Pentagon planning was well under way. “Planning is going on, in spite of public disavowals by Gates. Targets have been selected. For a bombing campaign against nuclear sites, it is quite advanced. The military assets to carry this out are being put in place.”He added: “We are planning for war. It is incredibly dangerous.”
Joseph at Cannonfire, David Kurtz at Talking Points Memo both fear / believe the article at The Guardian to be factually correct. David writes:
You can come up with a laundry list of reasons why attacking Iran would be a disaster, and you can come up with a decent list of reasons why the Administration is presently constrained by circumstances from doing so (not enough troops and hardware, for example). But you’d be hard-pressed to come up with any good reasons for why this Administration would be constrained by either circumstances or potentially disastrous outcomes. Besides, do these clowns still deserve the benefit of the doubt?
Indeed, there are many reason not to attack Iran, but there are also many reasons to believe that an attack is necessary to stop the Mullahs from obtaining nuclear weapons and to limit the negative role Iran plays in the region.
As I wrote before, I believe that the Bush administration / the international community should continue doing what it’s doing right now. All reports indicate that isolating Iran works. However, the U.S. and European countries should be willing to use force against Iran if absolutely necessary.
We should also remember that nuclear weapons aren’t the only problem. There is much more. It is also about Israel / Palestine. It is also about southern Lebanon, etc.
If the U.S. and European countries are not willing to use force against Iran, Iran will not change its policies, of that we can be quite sure. And if one threatens to use force, one should be prepared to use it (if absolutely necessary).
Although I am a ‘hawk’ it is my opinion – after reading all the information that came out about Iran the last couple of weeks – that attacking Iran right now would be… not merely unwise, but absolutely stupid. It is not necessary right now. An attack against Iran will, even if it is just against its nuclear sites, spark anger throughout the Muslim world. Ahmadinejad will most likely gain support immediately although most Iranians disapprove of him right now, etc.
This Spring? Still too early. Again, the sanctions are working. Iran is becoming increasingly isolated. Its economy is suffering. The extreme extremists who are now in power, represented by Ahmadinejad are losing popularity. Some reports indicate that the Mullahs might be willing to compromize, etc. I’d say continue on this path. Threaten to use force, but don’t do if it is not absolutely necessary. Weakening Iran might just do the trick. Focus on that but be prepared to use force if solid intelligence indicates that Iran is getting dangerously close to developing an atomic bomb.
