US decides against strike on Iran

Interesting...maybe this will put to rest all of the war talk with Iran.

menewsline.com...

Administration sources said President George Bush has decided that barring a ‘catastrophic development,’ the United States would not attack Iran. The sources said the administration has been relaying the decision to U.S. allies in the Middle East.

‘The United States has decided that Iran's cooperation was needed for a withdrawal from Iraq,’ an administration source said. ‘There won't be a situation where there will be cooperation and then war with Iran.’

It was obvious before the iraq debackle that the iranians should have been equalized.Forever to me this folly will mark this damnable administration.Charges of corruption and incompetence will be judged by history.IF americans can still claim the right of freedom of speech which i wonder about lately...

Originally posted by Xfile
It was obvious before the iraq debackle that the iranians should have been equalized.Forever to me this folly will mark this damnable administration.Charges of corruption and incompetence will be judged by history.IF americans can still claim the right of freedom of speech which i wonder about lately...

I would worry more about the number below than which country to "equalize" next...




But then again I dont have the "insight" and sense of "freedom" you seem to posses as a member of the US. I do agree you with the freedom of speech part though. Ive been following your press on certain issues and it would seem like the freedom of speech might still be there but the "media" seems to be more interested in the freedom of distraction and making money than actually telling the truth.

[edit on 6/6/07 by Gonjo]

Hmmmm – More Administration “sources.” I don’t know much about menewsline.com so I can’t really comment on their credibility. I tend to distrust almost anything from anonymous “sources.” Even if this is actually from a real, credible Administration source, it could actually be intended to send any number different messages.


1. The Administration could be simply saying this to get Iran to relax a little before we strike them.

2. The Administration may have determined that Iran truly wants a war and that if the US backs off they will be forced to start it making them the aggressor.

3. The Administration could be playing a political game with the Democrats to make them think they are having an influence on the President’s thinking or agenda.

4. The Administration could be trying to appear more diplomatic to the UN or the G8 or Europe to try to gain some advantage or agreement.

5. The Administration may have determined that war is coming to the Middle East anyway so the US can lay back and appear more conciliatory knowing the result will be the same.

6. The Administration may actually have information about something that is going to happen that will dramatically change the situation. Some people will assume that is a “false flag” attack on US forces but it could be intelligence indicating that someone else is going to make a move regardless of what the US does.

7. The Administration may even have decided that if all hell is going to break loose in the Middle East – which seems likely – it would be better politically to let it fester for two more years and blow up on the next - probably Democratic - President.


Another big problem with this statement is the caveat “barring a catastrophic development”. Since the President would be the one who decides what would constitute a catastrophic development that pretty much leaves the door wide open to anything. As much as people like to think Bush is an idiot, this could be a pretty good move. He can look more diplomatic and visionary while still doing exactly what he planned to do all along.

My bottom line on this is: Doesn’t change a darn thing!

When they say they won't strike Iran
I'm reading that as "Striking Iran was on the table, and still is"

Bush is a pussy. The war in Iraq was falsely justified for political popularity and now when this "genius" president is called upon to make a decision about something that really matters he proves what an impotent little whimp he really is.

A million Iraqi citizens and thousands of US troops have died for nothing save Bush's prized ego.

[edit on 7-6-2007 by sy.gunson]

Originally posted by sy.gunson
Bush is a pussy.

So, what have you accomplished with your life?

Do you really care how many Americans die maintaining our freedom or is second-guessing foreign heads of state just idle chit-chat for you?

Right. Oh that makes my night. Is this true? Is this the first time this government will tell the truth?

Are we suppose to beleive it? If we do how do we know there isnt something "bigger" being planned?

Talk to the hand, Mr. President. Nothing you say is true.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by sy.gunson
Bush is a pussy.

So, what have you accomplished with your life?

Do you really care how many Americans die maintaining our freedom or is second-guessing foreign heads of state just idle chit-chat for you?

I'm sorry? "Maintaining our freedom"? What exactly has illegally invading and occupying a non-aggressive country (as well as murdering countless Iraqis) got to do with our freedom?

Fancy another bowl full of propaganda, or are u full up for now?

My guess is that Ahmedinejad won't be any more fooled than you guys. The fact is that Bush cannot attack Iran at the moment, and my reading of a catastrophic turn of events could be something as trivial as calling Daddy Bush a pumpkin, if the situation viz the American populace was to change.

What happened to not being able to take any option off the table with regards the cessation of Iran's nuclear program?

Well i would classify a catastrophic event as an iranian attack upon israel or a U.S.warship in the gulf.But im not in the white house.

Originally posted by Xfile
Well i would classify a catastrophic event as an iranian attack upon israel or a U.S.warship in the gulf.But im not in the white house.

we dont need Iran to attack a US war ship israel could just as eaisly do that and get away with that job.

and i dont see Iran attacking Israel or the US unless its slef defence like the iranians have said.

Originally posted by Karilla
My guess is that Ahmedinejad won't be any more fooled than you guys. The fact is that Bush cannot attack Iran at the moment . . .

I agree that Ahmedinejad won't be fooled by anything that comes out of the US. In fact, I think he is doing a pretty good job of reading our politics and public mood and tailoring everything he says for maximum benefit to Iran.

As for the "fact" that Bush cannot attack Iran at the moment, I would have to disagree with you there. It is true the Army and Marines are heavily committed to Iraq, however, the Air Force and the Navy are only minimally involved. In addition, the Air Force and Navy have far more firepower than the ground troops.

If Bush took the decision to attack Iran, I believe the Air Froce and Navy would take the lead in the action. The US could launch a devastating Air attack against Iran with almost no prior warninig using assets already in the region and even some based in the US (B2 Bombers). I am not saying this would be a good course of action - only that it is very possible.


[edit on 8-6-2007 by itguysrule]

Perhaps Bush and his neocon crazy dudes have finally realised that public opinion is no longer with them for another war.
So, what to do? How about a "catastrophic development" forcing the US to respond. Sounds ominous, like another Pearl Harbour or 9/11 event may be planned to get the peeps back on board and baying for Iranian blood.
With all that Iraqi oil to protect I don't see US troops leaving Iraq any time soon.

I was thinking more of public opinion, congress and the senate. I am sure the strike capability is there, or could be made to be in short order, but would he really get away with it politically? His time is up soon, and I can't see him being allowed to start a war he won't be in charge of.

Why cant it just be that the US has decided that striking Iran isnt a good idea and that sanctions are the way to go? Maybe we figured out that if we do hit Iran, then it will start WW3. The difference between Iran and Iraq is that Iran is MUCH stronger than Iraq was when we attacked them. Plus, unlike Iraq, Iran controlls many other elements beyond its borders i.e. Syria, Hamas and Hizbollah that will no doubt draw Israel into conflict and it will all spiral out of control from there. All Iraq did to Israel was lob a few missles at them-Iran will do MUCH more.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by sy.gunson
Bush is a pussy.

So, what have you accomplished with your life?

Do you really care how many Americans die maintaining our freedom or is second-guessing foreign heads of state just idle chit-chat for you?

You say "Do you really care how many Americans die maintaning our freedom"????????

Maintining our freedom is to do it from the US itself bencause once you do it outside US soil you then become an invader...... an invader protecting the state of Israel and not American freedom.

In no way, form or shape was Sadaam EVER any danger to the US or anyone else in the Middle East, we invaded Iraq not for what he did but for what he might do in the future.

And now we are supposed to invade Iran for the same reasons, not for what they have done but for what they might do in the future......to the state of Israel.

"When the truth comes into the light, the lies will hide in the dark"... Ponce

Well, unfortunately since 9/11 we cannot afford to wait to be hit by the enemy then respond. We have to take the fight to where the folks who are aspiring to hit us are. Its a new strategy and war is not the same as it use to be. If we let the Mullahs get nukes and they pass them to Hizbollah then they come to the states and take out one or more of our cities, everyone will be crying "why didnt we stop Iran from getting nukes in the first place so that this wouldnt happen"?

Either way folks are gonna cry. They will cry if we do nothing, get hit, then complain about inaction, or they will cry that we are going on the offensive against countries who havent done anything...yet. Its just the way it is folks and there is nothing you or i can do about it except come onto sites like this and speak your mind. In the end though it doesnt matter, what will be done will be done.

Could it be that during the G8 summit bush was asking for support for going to war with Iran and found out that all or most leaders of the other countries have said no they wouldn't, leaving bush with just the US Army to go it alone which would be suicide for the US and himself to go it alone.

Or Russia and china have layed there cards down on the table and said they would support Iran in the case of the US going to war with Iran which has made other leaders back away from supporting the US.

it just seems suspicious that they have made this statement at the current time.

We have already been mislead by several groups into a war that should have never happened. Its now opened up on several fronts. Bear in mind it is to the advantage of Al-queda who is a sunni group that Iran which is a Shiite government be toppled. It would not only aid them in gaining ground in Iraq, but in Iran as well with an added bonus of muslims of all sects being killed by westerners (Americans). The Al-queda leader Al-Masri has already given his thanks to GW for helping them gain entry into Iraq and giving them a chance to expand. Bear in mind all these little findings could very well be just the bait for a trap. Iranian weapons, iranian equipment. Doesn't require a lot of money to buy black market. A small price to pay for a larger payoff if you ask me.


Instead of using the "this is my gun and this is my weapon" method...lets use our brain for a change. I think Al-queda laughs openly in the face of our president for his gullibility. We are in effect helping them every step of the way.


Al-Qeada Strikes Back