April 18, 2006

Bush: 'All Options on the Table' With Iran

From the AP via Yahoo! News:

President Bush said Tuesday that "all options are on the table" to prevent Iran from developing atomic weapons, but said he will continue to focus on the international diplomatic option to persuade Tehran to drop its nuclear ambitions.

"We want to solve this issue diplomatically and we're working hard to do so," Bush told reporters in the Rose Garden.

Bush also said there should be a unified effort involving countries "who recognize the danger of Iran having a nuclear weapon," and he noted that U.S. officials are working closely nations such as Great Britain, France and Germany on the issue."

"We will continue to work diplomatically," he said.

As Bush spoke, diplomats from six countries converged in Moscow to map out the next step toward solving the Iranian nuclear standoff. The United States and Britain say that if Iran does not comply with the U.N. Security Council's April 28 deadline to stop uranium enrichment, they will seek a resolution that would make the demand compulsory but Russia and China remain wary of sanctions.

Bush said he intends to call on Chinese President Hu Jintao to step up pressure on Iran when the two leaders meet Thursday at the White House.

Iran has so far refused to give up uranium enrichment, which the United States and some of its allies suspect is meant to produce weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

Bush was asked if his administration was planning for the possibility of a nuclear strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.

"All options are on the table," he said.

But, the president added: "We'll continue to work diplomatically to get this problem solved."


He's right, all the options are on the table with Iran, but look what they did with Iraq, isn't it obvious which options he's actually considering?

The Right likes to justify the Iraq invasion by the fact that Saddam ignored all THIRTEEN of those U.N. resolutions (isn't it funny how most of the time right wingers seem to hate everything the U.N. says or does, except for their resolutions for Iraq?). Yeah, we had nooooo other option for Iraq. We couldn't carry out a "coo" and have Saddam assassinated, we never do that kind of dirty business. We couldn't lift the sanctions against Iraq that were starving innocent people to death. We couldn't question the intelligence we were given that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, couldn't listen to the other intellegence from that CIA agent who actually investigated those claims, couldn't do any of that stuff.

Why? The "economy" wouldn't profit from it.

The current attention is supposedly the reason why gas prices have shot up so quickly in the past few weeks. What would happen if we took the whole war to Iran? Another $32 billion year for Exxon Mobile and so many dead American troups that they have to reinstate the Draft just to keep the oil and weapons companies happy?

No comments: