Skip to comments.Rice: U.S. Not Preparing for War Vs Iran
Posted on 06/02/2007 6:13:56 PM PDT by familyop
The U.S. is not preparing for war against Iran and Vice President Dick Cheney supports that policy, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says, taking a swipe at a U.N. official who says he's worried about "crazies" who want to start bombing.
"The president of the United States has made very clear what our policy is. That policy is supported by all the members of his Cabinet and by the vice president of the United States," Rice said Friday.
"The president has made clear that we are on a diplomatic course," she said in regard to U.S. opposition to Iran's nuclear ambitions.
Rice, in Spain at the close of a European visit, was asked about the comments of the chief of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency. Mohamed ElBaradei was quoted by the BBC as warning against the views of "new crazies who say 'let's go and bomb Iran.'"
Cheney is frequently the administration's most hawkish voice on Iran, but Rice said she did not know to whom ElBaradei referred. The United States does not rule out military action but says there is no plan or intention to attack Tehran.
Cheney has not publicly advocated an assault on Iran, but he used the deck of an aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf last month to warn Tehran that Washington would prevent the Islamic republic from dominating the Middle East.
Also stepping up pressure on Iran was President Bush, who demanded Friday that Iran "immediately and unconditionally" release four Iranian-Americans detained for alleged espionage and provide information about a former FBI agent missing in the country.
"I strongly condemn their detention at the hands of Iranian authorities," the president said in a written statement.
Rice was clearly annoyed by ElBaradei's remarks, which were part of an interview the International Atomic Energy Agency head gave for a documentary. The remarks were posted Friday on the BBC Web site.
Rice said the United States is using diplomacy to avoid "getting to a place where we have an unpalatable choice." She described that as a choice "between having to do something on the military side or allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon. That's a choice that people talk about."
Rice, who has tangled with ElBaradei before, suggested he is giving Iran mixed signals.
"We have a diplomatic choice, but it's only going to succeed if we are absolutely clear with the Iranians - not muddying the message in any way," she said.
Iran is getting the right message from the U.N. Security Council, which has ordered two rounds of sanctions over Iran's nuclear program, and from the world at large, Rice said.
"I expect them to hear it loud and clear from the IAEA, and from its director," she said.
Separately, in what could be an attempt to delay the threat of new U.N. sanctions, Iran has pledged to cooperate with the nuclear monitoring agency probing its atomic program, according to an official speaking to The Associated Press.
That would end years of stonewalling by Iran and help the IAEA establish whether Tehran's past nuclear efforts were exclusively peaceful in nature.
At the White House, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said Iran's defiance of U.N. mandates raises the prospect of a third U.N. resolution to increase pressure to suspend nuclear enrichment work.
While the U.S. continues its tough stance on Iran's nuclear program, Hadley said the United States agreed to talk to Iran about Iraq because the Iraqi government requested the meeting and because Iran's activities in Iraq are "killing our kids - our men and women in uniform over there."
U.S. and Iranian ambassadors held talks in Baghdad on Monday, the first formal ones between the two nations in nearly three decades. The two sides were to meet again in less than a month, but on Friday, Iran's foreign minister said, during a visit to Syria, they would continue "if the American side is willing to change its policies and is prepared to accept the realities in Iraq." He did not elaborate.
Rice's visit to Madrid was not connected to nuclear talks there Thursday between negotiators for Iran and the European Union. The talks ended without announcement of any breakthrough.
Rice is the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit Spain since a formerly close alliance turned frosty following the election of a Socialist government three years ago.
After hard feelings in Washington over Spain's quick pullout from Iraq and a dispute last year over Spanish plans to sell military equipment to Washington antagonist Huge Chavez of Venezuela, a fresh disagreement has threatened to wash away any growing good will.
At issue is Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos' decision to snub Cuban dissidents on a visit to Havana in April. Moratinos has defended the move, saying engagement with Cuba is the best policy.
When Moratinos predicted that in time Rice would see the value of his approach, Rice, listening to his remarks by translation on a headset, looked amused and unconvinced. As Moratinos continued to speak, she looked at the crowd of reporters and silently mouthed what appeared to be the phrase, "Don't hold your breath."
Associated Press Writers George Jahn in Madrid and Albert Aji in Damascus contributed to this report.
Military action in Iran not in anyones interest, says Gates http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1843874/posts
...redo with the link.
Military action in Iran not in anyones interest, says Gates http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1843874/posts
Hmmm. Looks like a political decision was reached.
I should have just voted for Kerry, I guess...
It seems to me that Gates and Rice just blinked, and Mohamed ElBaradei is the winner here.
“Rice: U.S. Not Preparing for War Vs Iran”
Shes a fool’s fool and so is her boss.
Iran is already making war against us.
Iran has increased arms shipments to both Iraq’s Shiite extremists and Afghanistan’s Taliban in recent weeks in an apparent attempt to pressure American and other Western troops operating in its two strategic neighbors, according to senior U.S. and European officials.
In Iraq, Iranian 240mm rockets, which have a range of up to 30 miles and could significantly change the battlefield, have been used recently by Shiite extremists against U.S. and British targets in Basra and Baghdad, the officials said. Three of the rockets have targeted U.S. facilities in Baghdad’s Green Zone, and one came very close to hitting the U.S. Embassy in the Iraqi capital, according to the U.S. officials.
The 240mm rocket is the biggest and longest-range weapon in the hands of Shiite extremist groups, U.S. officials say. Remnants of the rockets bear the markings of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps and are dated 2007, those sources said. The Tehran government has supplied the same weapon, known as the Fajr-3, to Hezbollah, the Shiite Muslim Lebanese militia.
I agree, but you don’t just send the two highest ranking cabinet members out there to plainly say it... DOH!
We don’t hear from Condi in what seems like MONTHS and this is what we get? She needs to don her black boots and “Matrix” overcoat again and do some @ss-kickin’.
She’s been making the same kind of statement every day or two about Iran.
Well, I’ve been working 50-60 hour weeks lately (soon to come to an end) which GREATLY cuts into my Freeping d@mmit, LOL!
I’m usually a real ‘Condi Hound’ but don’t see many articles here posted about her these days.
Ping me, would ya? Thanks! :)
It’s hard to believe this is the same woman who served as NSA in Bush’s first term. I’m starting to think there are some kind of pods growing under the State Department building or something.
Sure. Here’s some older news about Rice and Middle East Policy. I’ll try to get some of the more recent stuff regarding Iran.
Rice: Better to have Hamas in power than in streets
Rice: Palestinians deserve to live free of ‘occupation’[at an event of pro-Palestinian group]
US Supplies Fatah With Arms, Rice Decries “Occupation”
Rice: Israel Must Withdraw from More than Gaza and Samaria
2004 Republican Party Platform
(see the info about our “Roadmap”)
Im starting to think there are some kind of pods growing under the State Department building or something.
In reality, nothing has changed at State in decades. They still just pander and politic all day long. Same ole “stuff”.
The US isn’t planning to engage Iran militarily, because the plan and most of the combat power, are already in place.
And, no, engaging Iran militarily is not in anyone’s “best”interest.
Iran will not take losing their nuclear facilities lightly.
We will not enjoy their response.
It is a last resort, online if all else fails.
Among the possibilities are a US draft, a global depression, and world war.
Part of me understands perfectly the outrage felt when Iran kills even one US Serviceman, (do not think those are unilateral actions), and another part looks for the way through this matrix where the fewest overall US Servicemen die.
If you simply must have a confrontation, be advised...the only future that doesn’t include same is one in which Iran capitulates, in Iraq, and on the nuclear issue.
Iranian capitulation looks unlikely to me, and if they don’t, a military confrontation, before Bush leaves office, is the most likely result.
Here’s an interesting recent post.
Grand Illusions [Condi’s plan for the Middle East—Long]
Sounds like our state department is giving the green light to Israel? Just my take.
My hope is that Israel will continue to build its ABM defenses and stand fast. That might appear to be antithetical to my other comments but not if you notice the “range” in the following with a little knowledge of propaganda history and geography.
S. Korea, U.S. verifying reports on test of new N.K. missile in Iran: source
(4,000 kilometer range)
Her motto is "Speak softly and walk in big black boots." Just a couple of days ago she (uncharacteristically) very publicly and highly visibly slapped Vladimir Putin about Cold War mentality and put him in his place in the new World Order ("new" as in with Soviet Union gone). Day later he made a U-turn and joined UN sanctions against North Korea.
Russia makes U-turn, joins UN sanctions against N.Korea
There is no reason for us to say that we're preparing for WAR with Iran. We may bomb Iran's nuclear and military targets without calling it a WAR at an appropriate time, if UN or EUro-troika (Britain, Germany, France with their new and, on average, slightly improved leadership) declare that they are at impasse, or if we gradually and publicly document more evidence of hostile actions by Iran in Iraq to establish casus belli for military actions against Iran, but until that time comes, saying that WE are not preparing for WAR is simply good politics for "crazies' like el-Baradei.
Think Kosovo (atrocity, I know). But WAR is quite different from bombing or other [para-]military actions designed to advance a regime change or change of direction (which in this case would have to go hand in hand).
And, as another benefit, saying that we are not getting ready for "war" might spur a little more anxiety among the Iranian students' movement, leading them to think that their inaction may not be productive.
My 10 bucks says the Bilderberg group meeting that ended today in Turkey hashed it all out already.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.