Thread: Bush: I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran

Bush: I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran

The United States lacks sufficient intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities at this time, which prevents it from initiating a military strike against them, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has told European politicians and diplomats with whom she has recently met.

Rice mentioned three reasons why the United States is currently unable to carry out a military operation against Iran: the wish to solve the crisis through peaceful means; concern that a military strike will be ineffective - that it would fail to completely destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities; and the lack of precise intelligence on the targets' locations.

U.S. President George W. Bush and President Jacques Chirac of France met several weeks ago. Bush told his French counterpart that the possibility that Israel would carry out a strike against Iran's nuclear installations should not be ruled out.

Bush also said that if such an attack were to take place, he would understand it. According to European diplomats who later met with Rice, the secretary of state did not express the same willingness to show understanding for a possible Israeli strike against Iran.

Nonetheless, Rice did not discount the possibility that such an operation may take place.

Unbelievable...

Yes! unbelievable! Chirac is President of France again!

How far back on articles are we going now to find new things to trash Bush about?
Sad

No doubt that Defensor is trying to portray Bush here as a war monger and notice what parts he put in bold.

Bush told his French counterpart that the possibility that Israel would carry out a strike against Iran's nuclear installations should not be ruled out.

and..

Bush also said that if such an attack were to take place, he would understand it



Now look at what part he diecided not to highlight because it did not fit into his plan to paint Bush as a warmonger...

Rice mentioned three reasons why the United States is currently unable to carry out a military operation against Iran: the wish to solve the crisis through peaceful means


What a crock...

Originally Posted by Bert Spivey

Rice mentioned three reasons why the United States is currently unable to carry out a military operation against Iran: the wish to solve the crisis through peaceful means

According to European diplomats who later met with Rice, the secretary of state did not express the same willingness to show understanding for a possible Israeli strike against Iran.

Rice mentioned three reasons why the United States is currently unable to carry out a military operation against Iran: the wish to solve the crisis through peaceful means; concern that a military strike will be ineffective - that it would fail to completely destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities; and the lack of precise intelligence on the targets' locations.



Bush has been "understanding" an invasion of Iran for well over a year, and even going over his own government's head to do so.

Originally Posted by Defensor

According to European diplomats who later met with Rice, the secretary of state did not express the same willingness to show understanding for a possible Israeli strike against Iran.

Rice mentioned three reasons why the United States is currently unable to carry out a military operation against Iran: the wish to solve the crisis through peaceful means; concern that a military strike will be ineffective - that it would fail to completely destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities; and the lack of precise intelligence on the targets' locations.



Bush has been "understanding" an invasion of Iran for well over a year, and even going over his own government's head to do so.

So Bush is to blame if another country attacks Iran? That's rich. BTW could you possibly find a link that is a little bit older?

Bush has been "understanding" an invasion of Iran for well over a year, and even going over his own government's head to do so.

And has there been any military action agains Iran?
Nope.

Originally Posted by Bert Spivey

And has there been any military action agains Iran?
Nope.

To spell it out for you:

Peaceful people don't want more war. Our powers that be hint at it all the time.

While I don't believe demonizing or dehumanizing Bush does any good, it is his words and actions that keep war on the horizon in concerns to Iran...and as I've explained, certain people don't wish to have another war, especially with yet another ME country. While you are correct in 90% of what you say it doesn't make war less likely to occur in the future... and to me at least, that sucks.

If there is no other way around it, I suppose we should just bomb everything we fear, but instead, we tend to bomb first then hope there is nothing to fear. I'm just glad all the other countries in the world don't wish to disarm us like we do them. This conversation wouldn't be about what ifs but more along the lines of: "have anything to eat?"

uh... how could the United States NOT understand an Isreali strike on Iranian nuclear technology? They have gone to war with Jordan, Syria and Egypt several times, they have conducted strikes on nuclear facilities in Iraq and Syria in peacetime, and they are easily the most hated nation in the region. If he didn't understand it, I would think him to be even more dumb that I believe him to be now.

Originally Posted by Bert Spivey

No doubt that Defensor is trying to portray Bush here as a war monger and notice what parts he put in bold.

Bush told his French counterpart that the possibility that Israel would carry out a strike against Iran's nuclear installations should not be ruled out.

and..

Bush also said that if such an attack were to take place, he would understand it



Now look at what part he diecided not to highlight because it did not fit into his plan to paint Bush as a warmonger...

Rice mentioned three reasons why the United States is currently unable to carry out a military operation against Iran: the wish to solve the crisis through peaceful means


What a crock...

No it's not a crock. Bush supporters seem to have blinders on or are ignorant of history. PNAC is, in and of itself, the warmongers guide to American imperialism. The fact that our middle eastern policy has been pretty much dictated by the Israel lobby would mean that an Israeli attack on Iran would put us in grave danger. Bush and his cronies are either fundamentalist christians that believe that the creation of the state of Israel is a biblical prophecy come true or they are Jews themselves. According to the mulsim fundamentalists...anything Israel does has OUR name all over it. That would spell disaster.