In what's described as a "farewell tour," President Bush is on a six-country European visit. Included in his agenda is asking his hosts to make greater contributions to Afghanistan -- both in money and troops, as well as the ongoing issue of Iran's nuclear program.
When asked about Iran at a press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Bush repeated his standard refrain of, "all options are on the table."
The president has used this statement frequently in the past, but it seems to have lost its luster since used at the Rose Garden in 2006 when responding to reporters about Iran's nuclear file and Ahmadinejad's defiance regarding it. At that time, analysts and pundits predicted an attack on Iran was imminent.
This time however, the buzz was missing, and his veiled threat to Iran seems of little concern to Ahmadinejad. If anything the Iranian president has been mocking Bush's threats, saying "Bush's time is up, and he was not able to harm even one centimeter of our land." He went on to describe an attack on Iran by Bush as "wishful thinking."
Obviously Mr. Bush did not make a direct threat about attacking Iran; many experts would argue the "all options on the table" slogan can mean many things. There is the economic sanctions option, the United Nations option, the diplomacy option, the IAEA option and the list goes on. But in the Middle East, Bush's words mean only one thing: the military option. This is how most journalist colleagues of mine interpret it whenever Bush or Rice makes such statements. They always ask me "is Bush going to attack Iran?", as if I were a guru on the Bush administration's war intentions.
Their fears however, are legitimate. Despite all the Bush administration's woes -- the Iraqi debacle, the economy, oil prices, and most recently the US Supreme Court's decision on Guantanamo prisoners -- the administration's surrogates continue to rattle the saber towards Iran in the U.S. media. Just last night I was watching FOX news and talk about hitting Iran was ongoing.
What will happen if the U.S. even drops one bomb on Iran?
All oil exports from Iran will cease, removing close to twenty million barrels of oil from world markets within days. Iran would stop traffic in the Strait of Hormuz by attacking oil tankers. It may even attack key oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, Iraq and other Gulf countries with its arsenal of Chinese Silkworm missiles.
If people are lamenting over gas prices approaching five dollars, I guarantee you that they will top off $10.00 at the pump and more than $200 a barrel within hours of an attack. The US can't afford to attack Iran and Ahmadinejad knows this. That's why he has a grin on his face.
Jamal Dajani produces the Mosaic Intelligence Report on Link TV
Follow Jamal Dajani on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jamaldajani
According to Vincent Bugliosi, a proven prosecutor who put Charles Manson behind bars, says in his NYT best seller just published "The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder", the best evidence for first degree murder was not the Downing Street Memo but the Manning Report: Briefly the argumemt in court would be that if Bush actually believed that Saddam had WMD (which was the main reason why he invaded Iraq) he would never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever have wanted to PROVOKE someone who was so intent on killing him, into war. The Manning Report describes how Bush told Blair that he would provoke Saddam into attacking unmanned drones painted with the UN flag flying over Baghdad. Why would he do this of he was so convinced about the WMD?
http://www.thomhartmann.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=104&id=242336&catid=63&func=fb_pdf
The Manning report is so hot and damning, it has already been removed from the internet on many sites.Manning was Blair's chief foreign policy advisor.
Either way, this proves how readily Bush would employ a false flag, and this would most assuredly be the way Bush provokes IRAN with the same trick. Once Iran "attacks" (wink, wink) the US/Israel, fear will cause the sheeple to vote for McCain in the elections.
Voila. Our dictatorship will continue.
As for Ahmadinejad & Bush... well, I think if they were not in power, the world would breath a little easier without these hot heads full of hot air going off at the mouth as they do. How easy it is for them to play power games like this while we're all just their little pawns.
Bush does NOT speak for me.. and I am sure Ahmadinejad does NOT speak for all of Iran.
It's tiring this game they all play and at our (the world's) expense really.
Regarding Iran, since Iran has been isolated from American Businesses, the big gainers have been mainly China, India and Russia. At the time American businesses were prohibited to do business in Iran, Chinese and Russian businesses have been signing multi-billion Dollars contracts. If US-Iran relations is ever improved, Iran would make a strong and effective US ally in the Middle East and US may not have to rely on Israel so much. Consequntly there would be no longer any reason for billions of Dollars of annually financial and military US aides to Israel. For that exact reason, every time there is a chance that there could be some improvement in the US-Iran relation, the process is sabotaged directly by Israel or indirectly via Israel’s special interest groups. We have to learn to elect politicians who focus at America’s Interest not others.
But thems the bad guys , I am sure many idiots will say.
Israel has them though, LOTS of them, undocumented and in violation of more UN resolutions to add on their growing list.
The IAEA report from June 3, 1998 titled
"Israeli Nuclear capabilities and Threats"
Covers the Israeli Nuke problem and how their having these weapons is possibly the biggest threat in the middle east and the safety of the world. But of course no one in the US has the balls to talk of this, as they coddle the Israeli government. I have nothing against anyone who is of Jewish faith. I do have problems with their government and their policies, just as I have problems with my own government and its policies.
http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC42/GC42Documents/English/gc42-8_en.pdf
Lets see if this gets censored out too.
and NOBODY worries about the uberhawks in Israel having nukes? something is really 'inconsistent' with the US position
I hope if he's president, Obama has the stones to stand up to Iran, and do something about it when he emerges from his little fireside chat (without pre-conditions) understanding what Bush understands.
Like it or not, Iran, Hamas, and the rest of their ilk respect one thing, strength..
Hmm, I guess thats why Hezbollah no longer dares to stage any attacks against Israel... .because they won.
Regardless, ANY Muslim military force that manages not to run away from a Western-style army is automatically considered heroes by other Muslims.
shameful
embarrassing
eve il took the first bite of the forbidden fruit
jesus came to change all that
the persians are the leaders, above beyond and always will be the original christians
all hail jesus
the other day I had to explain to a nice chinese student why we use bush's name in a vulgar way
poor guy bring him back to maine for some booze and coke - there's plenty there I hear
let him recuperate and then ship him off to iraq where he can be greeted with democracy and freedom
There is no way out of this by increasing domestic production. Period. It's way too late to start, there isn't enough definite production to be had with traditional methods even if you threw out every environmental restriction, it takes much too long to bring new fields on line, and non-traditional methods take too much development time and money.
The only hope for America is a drastic conservation movement - a 25% cut in gasoline consumption in one year. It can be accomplished, but it won't be easy. Even with a cut of that magnitude, we'd still be consuming more than 50% more oil per capita than the next-largest per capita consuming nation in the world. We have to stop wasting energy. Period. Now.