WAR: Britain Against Military Strikes On Iran

In a 200-page dossier, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw makes a case against any military strikes on Iran- amid fears that the Bush administration would seek support for such a conflict. The document was issued quietly in the House of Commons on the eve of President Bush's inauguration. It cites that a peaceful solution led by Britain, France and Germany was "in the best interests of Iran and the international community", as well as "safeguarding Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology".



I find this dossier interesting in that it seeks to curtail any Bush administration notion that the UK would support military action on Iran, before it even gets started. As mentioned in other threads, premptive strikes on Iran just don't make much sense, as they would likely just solve a short term problem and induce Iran to increase funding for its nuclear weapon program in the long run. And if the US had any notion of a full scale invasion of Iran, it would most likely need the help of key allies, for which now the administration can count any assistance from Great Britain- out.

Related News Links:
dailytelegraph.news.com.au
www.couriermail.news.com.au

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Iran Claims 'The Greatest Deterrent'
Iran issues sharp warning to US over any military action
US special forces 'inside Iran'
For or Against War with Iran

It looks like a political and economic move to save face. UK knows that it cannot afford a war on two fronts, especially one with Iran which is very expensive. Further, Tony Blair does not want to alienate the British public any further as election season approaches and it is fairly obvious the British public will not be supporting this war.

However, this does not mean the British government is doing this for moral or legal reasons. It may still be supporting the war. However, it knows that America and Israel already have adequate military power to fight the war and that it's contribution would be minimal - more of a token gesture.

Therefore for Blair it is not worth risking poltical power and the economic expenses for a token gesture. However, it maybe so, that Britain intends to join later when the public are more supportive of a war(problem - reaction- solution) in the case there is another staged terrorist attack like 9/11 to rally support for a war.

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
However, it knows that America and Israel already have adequate military power to fight the war and that it's contribution would be minimal - more of a token gesture.

Nice points, Indigo. And I have a question for you. So you feel like Israel and America (with no instituted draft?) combined would be enough for an all out land invasion war against Iran, with no futher support from any other allies?

Did we not just give israel $585,000,000 worth of Bunker Busters about 6 months ago? Who are we kidding. If we don't strike, Israel will. And of course we will be tarred by the same brush.
Over the past 5 wars Israel has had three where prememtive strikes are used. Somehow the morality of this is lost on me. I know of a guy up the street that has been stealing and is just a bad dude. Maybe what I need to do is blow him away and when the cops come down I will just tell them that I have had the need of a premptive strike. I was afraid he might steal, or hurt my family.

Our support of this type of thinking is absurd. We do not need to follow Israels intense insecurity in this world. We need to control them and not let them control us.

Israel will not strike Iran, Iran has the capability to hit them back. Its a nice little stand off.

The British public would not support the war, if there ever was one. There would be pretty much zero help from the EU.

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Israel will not strike Iran, Iran has the capability to hit them back. Its a nice little stand off.

The British public would not support the war, if there ever was one. There would be pretty much zero help from the EU.

I would not write off Israel,
If Iran does start to develop nuclear weapons, Israel will strike them.

I certainly think that Israel will strike Iran. Why the gift of our tax payers dollars of those bunker busters. The can reach deep into the ground. I think Israel is at this point the most dangerous nation in the world today. Coupled with 200-300 nuclear weapons and having the US Bull by the ring in its nose they will stop at nothing. This puts us in a very dangerous position. It puts the world in a terribly unstable position.

A good guideline to countries likely actions on Iran would be to look at what weapons their buying.

eg If the UK is suddenly buying lots of Bunker Busters then we could see that their thinking of invading Iran......just a thought.

Whoops, I wonder how our administration will take this news, but not to worry people the Bush administration will make sure that some nice "incentives" are offer to UK to pay for the pains and sorrows.

That is how US keeps it's long time friends happy.