Can't rule out attack on Iran, White House says

[voivod]

• White House says no attack planned against Iran, but won't rule out possibility.
• National security adviser Stephen Hadley says diplomacy should resolve issues.
• Hadley won't say whether he believes move on Iran would need congressional OK.
• Iran says U.S. detention of Iranians in Iraq is "illegal" .

The White House said Sunday it is not planning military action against Iran, but refused to rule out the possibility, bucking pressure from several senators who said the administration is not authorized to do so.

Asked whether the United States is preparing for a potential military conflict with Iran, President Bush's national security adviser Stephen Hadley told NBC's "Meet the Press," "No, the president has said very clearly that the issues we have with Iran should be solved diplomatically."

But, on ABC's "This Week," Hadley would not rule out the possibility of such an attack and would not say whether he agrees with those senators who say that the Bush administration would need congressional backing for such a move.

The sharp questioning about U.S. plans for Iran followed Bush's address to the nation Wednesday night announcing his strategy for Iraq, in which he vowed the United States "will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq." (Full story)

The Bush administration accuses Iran of sending fighters into Iraq and attacking U.S. troops. Tehran denies the charges.

"The priority is what's going on in Iraq," Hadley told ABC. "That's the place where the activity's occurring. That's the best place... for us to take this on."

Asked repeatedly whether the United States has the authority to enter Iran if it believes doing so would help prevent attacks, Hadley did not answer. Then came this exchange:

Host George Stephanopoulos: "So, you don't believe you have the authority to go into Iran?"

Hadley: "I didn't say that. This is another issue. Any time you have questions about crossing international borders, there are legal issues."

Several senators have voiced opposition to the idea of the United States entering Iran.

Last week, Sen. Joe Biden, D-Delaware, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during a hearing on Iraq, "I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that, and he does need congressional authority to do that."

Rice did not rule out entering Iran or give a position on whether the Bush administration would need congressional approval.

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska, told Rice, "No one in our government can sit here today and tell Americans that we won't engage the Iranians and the Syrians cross-border."

Comparisons to Vietnam war
"When our government lied to the American people and said, 'We didn't cross the border going into Cambodia,' in fact, we did," Hagel said, referring to the Vietnam war. "So, Madam Secretary, when you set in motion the kind of policy that the president is talking about here, it's very, very dangerous."

During the Vietnam war, the Nixon administration denied U.S. troops were conducting raids into neighboring Cambodia to stop the flow of weapons to South Vietnam's communist insurgency.

The Bush administration says dramatic action must be taken in Iraq to halt alleged Iranian meddling.

Vice President Dick Cheney took that message to "Fox News Sunday," saying, "It's been pretty well-known that Iran is fishing in troubled waters, if you will, inside Iraq. And the president has responded to that. ... I think it's exactly the right thing to do."

Tehran: U.S. violates 'diplomatic norms'
Iranian officials portray the U.S. assertions as trumped-up lies aimed at fomenting tension and backing "illegitimate" actions against Iranians in Iraq.

Tehran's complaints follow several steps by the U.S. military against Iranian officials in Iraq, including the detention last week of five people who the United States said are linked to the Iranian military. (Full story)

Seyed Mohammad-Ali Hosseini, spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry, called the U.S. actions "illegal."

He accused the United States of violating "international conventions and diplomatic norms," and called on the United States "to immediately release the Iranian consular employees and pay for damages" that the military action caused to the building, Iran's government-run media outlet IRNA reported.

But the U.S. military, in a news release, said preliminary information revealed the five detained Iranians "are connected to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard - Qods Force, an organization known for providing funds, weapons, improvised explosive device technology and training to extremist groups attempting to destabilize the government of Iraq and attack coalition forces."

Iraqi FM cites 'brotherly relations'
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said he phoned his Iranian counterpart, Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, on Friday to assure him that steps were being taken to free the five.

In a written statement, Zebari said he told Mottaki that he hoped the incident "would not affect the brotherly relations between the two peoples and the two neighbor countries."

Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, told CBS' "Face the Nation" that he does not believe Bush is looking to open a front in Iran.

"But I think it's very, very important that if Iranians are in Iraq paying people to be suicide bombers, to help the training and equipping them ... it's vital that we go after them too. Everybody knows the Iranians are playing in Iraq and they are trying to drive us out of Iraq so they can assert their age-old ambitions for influence in the Middle East. Everybody knows that. If there's Iranians in Iraq who are doing bad things, go after them, and let's get them."

[Axxman300]

White House says no attack planned against Iran, but won't rule out possibility.

Everything you need to know is in the very first sentence.

I have not planned to masterbate today, but I haven't ruled it out.

I haven't planned to max out my credit card but I haven't ruled it out.


It's a non-statement to a rigged question, just like "Yes or No, have you stopped beating your wife?". It's a non-issue, a Mole-Hill ,a McGuffin or if you will: a Federline.

Everyone wants us to go to war with Iran, everyone except George W Bush. Come on, the President lacks subtlety, if he had a problem with Iran he'd say so and he's not.

[Dr5115]

Interesting............

I think it's safe to say Iran will be attacked by someone. If we don't do anything the Israelis probably will. Guess we're thinkning of beating the Israelis to the punch.

Didn't Iraq start out with "diplomacy first" talk as well?

[cyberfiddl]

We sent Madeleine Albright to talk to Korea and now they have nukes. Now the libs want to talk to Iran and Syria.
Maybe talk ain't so cheap.

[Axxman300]

Let's talk reality for a second.

President Amudina-whatever just lost a major election in Iran. His candidates all lost. These are regional elections that have little bearing on foriegn policy, but the message from the Iranian people to their President was clear: "Fuck you, Asshole!". This was lost on western and American news because the US was busy saying the same thing to it's President.

What does that mean?

There's room for hope and progress, the Iranians don't like the direction their government is going anymore than anybody else does. The second after the first US or Israeli bomb falls this hope vanishes. The Iranian people will fall in line behind their psycho President. I think that this is what he and the Mullahs that control him want, war with the West is the only way they can stay in power.

We've got a big enough mess in Iraq that's barely under control, there's just nothing we can do with Iran that would be smart at the moment except let their President flap his gums.

[ZeoBandit]

Just bail on the middle east and let them solve their own problems.

[graeme]

A few points:

A second carrier has been sent to the Persian gulf, to sit at the strait. A second carrier is not needed for Iraq so at the very least this would be seen as expecting a bit of trouble, perhaps provocative and at worst, manouvering for an expected flare up or even straightforward attack.

From what I understand, if US forces are being attacked directly or indirectly in Iraq by Iran, they do not need congress to authorise cross border action. It would be defence of existing forces. I'm not positive on this one but I'm sure I've read this somewhere. If wrong I stand corrected.

Ahmedinajad lost the local elections in Iran by a landslide because of internal factors. The Iranian people said that their president was TOO concerned with the west and NOT ENOUGH with domestic policy including rising rates of unemployment, crime and drugs, not to mention an economic downturn.
He does still seem to be supported for his anti-western stance, thought ime will tell on that one, depending on the outcome.

The US has long had constantly revised plans for attacking Iran so I guess the question is not so much, "are there plans" as "are there movements toward implementing those plans."?

[ZeoBandit]

If they were made by the same people who had a plan for Iraq, then those plans need to be thrown out.

[Axxman300]

The Carrier is the Stennis and it's there to increase air asset availability over Iraq AND to serve as a deterrent to Iranian nincompoopery.

Everything you need to know about the deployment, the Stennis and aircraft carrier battle groups:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...y/navy/ctf.htm

[graeme]

nincompoopery is a word that I love yet just don't use enough.
I will teach it to my students tomorrow.

Thanks Ax.

[Axxman300]

[KRAMER5150]

thats great,first we sell them all of their weapons basically and think about attacking them

[Axxman300]

thats great,first we sell them all of their weapons basically and think about attacking them

Huh?

We haven't sold them any working weapons since 1979. That's like getting upset about Van Halen 2.

[KRAMER5150]

read up

[Aristotle]

Let's talk reality for a second.

President Amudina-whatever just lost a major election in Iran. His candidates all lost. These are regional elections that have little bearing on foriegn policy, but the message from the Iranian people to their President was clear: "Fuck you, Asshole!". This was lost on western and American news because the US was busy saying the same thing to it's President.

What does that mean?

There's room for hope and progress, the Iranians don't like the direction their government is going anymore than anybody else does. The second after the first US or Israeli bomb falls this hope vanishes. The Iranian people will fall in line behind their psycho President. I think that this is what he and the Mullahs that control him want, war with the West is the only way they can stay in power.

We've got a big enough mess in Iraq that's barely under control, there's just nothing we can do with Iran that would be smart at the moment except let their President flap his gums.

I agree with this. But the point is not that people will rally behind their leader, the point is that wars give even more extraordinary powers to Governments to shut down internal decent. So any internal pressure for change will vanish quickly.

There are many things happening in Iran internally. As with many local elections around the world, the recent ones in Iran can be viewed as a referendum of public opinion towards the government. But what is not being discussed here is that the other (more important) elections for the Assembley of Experts signalled a drastic changing of the guards at the highest level. The word is that the Supreme Leader (who directly controls all Foreign and Defence policies) is ill and will most likely retire soon. The replacement will be chosen by the Assembley of Experts.

Now you can see more clearly why the president is being so antagonistic towards the west. If things in Iran take their natural course then there will be some very important changes against him. But if he can provoke a severe response then he can stave off the changes.

I can keep anyone interested informed from time to time (write me a PM).