A few weeks ago Media Mouse posted an update about United States actions against Iran, specifically referencing an article by Seymour Hersch revealing that the United States had begun flying combat planes over Iran. Since that time there has been a great degree of speculation about the Bush administration’s possible plans, although most of the reporting on the subject has not advanced beyond this rudimentary level.
While the President George W. Bush and Condoleeza Rice have recently used harsh words to warn Iran to stop its nuclear program, they claim that the United States wants to use diplomacy and that the use of force is not currently an option. Critics of the Bush administration have pointed out that the rhetoric is similar to what was used at this stage of the Iraq war, but such an attack remains military and logistically unfeasible in light of insurgency in Iraq and the United States’ failure to provide any proof of its allegations against Iran. Much of the public discourse on military actions against Iran has pointed to a huge backlash in the region, whether that be via nuclear means from Iran as former United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix has suggested or via other means as suggested in rhetoric coming from Israel and Iran. Vice President Dick Cheney first raised the possibility that Israel might choose to preemptively attack Iranian nuclear reactors as it did Iraq’s in the 1980s, an observation that has gained some credence in light of comments by the head of the Israeli Air Force warning that the IAF must be ready for such strikes, a move that would even further undermine the United States’ position in the region. Iran, for their part, has made their own threats–warning the United States not to play with “fire” and to let the diplomatic negotiations with Europe work while entering into a mutual defense pact with Syria and is preparing for the defense of its territory with public military excercises
Related posts:
