>We verliezen de ene oorlog, dus starten we de volgende….

>Gisteren schreef ik:

Laten we wel wezen: alle berichtgeving over gesprekken tussen Iran en de VS ten spijt, Iran staat nu eenmaal op de oorlogsagenda van de neo-cons, die er niet voor terugdeinzen om onderhandelingen over de Iraanse nucleaire ambities te dwarsbomen, als dat zo uitkomt.

En het lijkt er nog steeds niet op dat de Amerikaanse neocons er op uit zijn een oorlog met Iran te voorkomen en te onderhandelen:

Cheney sabotages talks with Iran

leave it to Dick Cheney to dash hopes for any cooler heads to prevail between Washington and Tehran.

Remember, it was Cheney who did everything in his power to hype the Iraq War and scuttle any possibility of a diplomatic solution prior to that conflict.

Now he’s doing the same with Iran.

Even as the State Department and the National Security Council are at least exploring the possibility of talking with Tehran, the Vice President of the United States, in typical fashion, is sabotaging that effort.

On Friday, aboard an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf, Cheney rattled a saber at Ahmedinejad.

Cheney said: “With two carrier strike groups in the Gulf, we’re sending clear messages to friends and adversaries alike.”

In case anyone missed what he was referring to, Cheney spelled it out: “We’ll stand with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating the region.”

By “with others,” Cheney was referring to Israel, which has already threatened to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities. Back in January 2005, Cheney sympathized with Israel’s desire to attack Iran first:

“One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked, that if in fact the Israelis became convinced the Iranians had a significant nuclear capability, given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of the state of Israel, that the Israelis might well decide to act first.”

Cheney also may have been referring to Saudi Arabia, which doesn’t want to see an ascendant Shiite Iran across the gulf.

In any event, Cheney’s message got through.

Ahmedinejad, who thrives on rhetorical clashes with Washington, warned that Iran would retaliate if the United States attacked it. Lees verder

(Natuurlijk refereert de vice-president naar Saudi-Arabië; zie log over de Kamervragen van Van Bommel)

WE MUST ATTACK IRAN BEFORE IT GETS THE BOMB

“If we can’t get enough other countries to come along with us to do that, then we’ve got to go with regime change by bolstering opposition groups and the like, because that’s the circumstance most likely for an Iranian government to decide that it’s safer not to pursue nuclear weapons than to continue to do so. And if all else fails, if the choice is between a nuclear-capable Iran and the use of force, then I think we need to look at the use of force.”

President George W Bush privately refers to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has pledged to wipe Israel “off the map”, as a 21st Century Adolf Hitler and Mr Bolton, who remains a close ally of Vice President Dick Cheney, said the Iranian leader presented a similar threat. Neocon-havik John Bolton in de Daily Telegraph

(merk op dat opnieuw de verkeerd vertaalde versie van Ahmadinejad’s uitspraken over regime change in Israël wordt opgevoerd door de krant)

House Dems indicate they are more united on Iran legislation: Will AIPAC buy the vote?

House Democrats, who have been divided on whether the president needs authorization from Congress to attack Iran, suggested yesterday that they are more united on the controversial issue.

But with Iran measures possibly headed to the House floor as early as today, it is unclear if Democrats have the votes to pass legislation calling for the president to seek authorization from Congress for a preemptive strike on Iran.

House Democratic leaders initially attempted to insert Iran language in their now-vetoed Iraq supplemental bill after some New York Democrats, including Reps. Eliot Engel and Gary Ackerman, balked at the language.

The American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), an influential group that advocates strong U.S. ties with Israel, lobbied heavily to remove the Iran provision in the supplemental, arguing that the measure would weaken President Bush’s attempts to dissuade Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Lees verder

(AIPAC? Irak? 9/11? Iran? Vertel! Waarheen leidt de weg???)

BUSH MAY STRIKE IRAN NEAR THE END OF TERM

While arguing that economic sanctions against Teheran still have a chance of bearing fruit, a top strategic expert predicted on Tuesday that the Bush administration could conduct a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities toward the end of its term in office.

“I, for one, don’t exclude the possibility that the US will act,” Shai Feldman, currently director of the Crown Center for Middle East studies at Brandeis University, told an editorial meeting of The Jerusalem Post. “My feeling, though, is that if it will act, it will act in the last months of the administration, mostly because I think that they are inclined to try to give the other options the fullest possible chance.”

US President George W. Bush, still embroiled in the war in Iraq, would be reluctant to take action against Iran until the the latter part of his term, which concludes on January 20, 2009, Feldman said.

“The paradox of this is that the closer you are to a position of being a lame-duck president, the more freedom of action you have,” he said. Jerusalem Post

(Bush’ populariteit ligt zo onderhand nog lager dan de zeespiegel, terwijl peace-kandidaten als Dennis Kucinich en vooral Ron Paul steeds populairder worden.)

Iran. Wát er ook gebeurt…