U.S. Officials Begin Crafting Iran Bomb Plan

Fox News:

A recent decision by German officials to withhold support for any new sanctions against Iran has pushed a broad spectrum of officials in Washington to develop potential scenarios for a military attack on the Islamic regime, FOX News confirmed Tuesday.

Germany -- a pivotal player among three European nations to rein in Iran's nuclear program over the last two-and-a-half years through a mixture of diplomacy and sanctions supported by the United States -- notified its allies last week that the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel refuses to support the imposition of any further sanctions against Iran that could be imposed by the U.N. Security Council.

Read the whole story: Fox News

Comments

[wadenelson1]

11:08 PM on 09/12/2007

And the AP can't find any particular reason why oil went to $80 a barrel.

[dryfactoidobotanoid]

09:48 PM on 09/12/2007

"We do not need a bomb. We are against bombs, actually. There are many reasons we are against it," Ahmadinejad said. "From a political point of view, it's not useful, we think."

[RanTalbott]

09:14 PM on 09/12/2007

So, now we've progressed from the rule of international law (where you have to have an _actual_ reason to go to war), to the Bush Doctrine (where you just have to pretend that there _will be_ a reason sometime soon), to the Cheney Doctrine (where you can go to war just because you feel like it).

[dryfactoidobotanoid]

09:14 PM on 09/12/2007

meanwhile, in the UN ...

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22404789-5005961,00.html
"UN nuclear chief Mohamed ElBaradei walked out on an afternoon session of his IAEA to protest an EU speech which did not fully support his deal for new inspections in Iran, diplomats said."

[dryfactoidobotanoid]

09:14 PM on 09/12/2007

(copy and paste the url)

[dryfactoidobotanoid]

08:43 PM on 09/12/2007

why doesn't Iran invest in solar energy instead?

the United States could even help them set up solar power mega-installations, like the Russians are helping them build nuclear reactors.

[RanTalbott]

12:07 AM on 09/13/2007

Solar makes sense in some scenarios, but not others. In areas of high population densities, especially where load is fairly even through the day, nuclear wins hands-down in cost/Watt. Solar wins when the population is dispersed and the cost of the distribution network gets higher than the cost of energy storage.

Ideally, they should be working on both.

[dryfactoidobotanoid]

02:46 AM on 09/13/2007

that makes no sense. electricity = electricity. distribution costs are the same whatever the source.

[wadenelson1]

08:43 PM on 09/12/2007

pity the poor democrat who inherits this clusterfook.

[bmermaid]

07:50 PM on 09/12/2007

Put your head between your knees & kiss your ass good-bye.

WWIII is closer than ever.