Skip to comments.Panetta: Iran Strike Could Impact World Economy
Posted on 11/18/2011 12:47:58 AM PST by Eleutheria5
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said on Thursday he would raise American concerns about the unintended consequences of any military action against Iran during his upcoming meeting with Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Reuters reported.
Panetta and Barak are due to meet on Friday in Halifax, Canada.
Speaking to reporters traveling with him to Canada, Panetta said the United States believed the most effective way to confront Iran still was to use diplomatic pressure and sanctions.
Obviously to go beyond that raises our concerns about the unintended consequences that could result, Reuters quoted Panetta as having said.
Echoing remarks he made last week, Panetta pointed to a U.S. analysis that a strike on Iran would set back its nuclear program by one or two years at most.
Finally, he said, there are going to be economic consequences to that, that could impact not just on our economy but the world economy. So those things all need to be considered.
Asked what message he will deliver to Barak during their meeting, Panetta said, Ive made those points before and I'll discuss them again.
The United States feels strongly that the way to deal with that is to work with our allies, to work with the international community to develop the sanctions and the diplomatic efforts that would further isolate Iran," he emphasized. That is the most effective way to confront them at this point.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
Nuke Qom from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.
Yeah, ya think? ... like the Nazis and Commies and WWII?
Panneta (Italian for little piece of bread?) = FAIL
Pannetta: just another Clinton retread.
If we were to attack Iran, We would likely have $200.00 a barrel oil for a while, but it would come down in price after a few years and that $200.00 a barrel oil would create many oilfield jobs.
Even more, attacking Iran might, in fact, affect the world economy. Who could possibly imagine such a consequence? What an amazing insight from Panetta! We should be thankful to be graced by such leadership, insight, and wisdom.
THERE. FIXED IT.
If this wasn’t about such a serious matter, it would make for an excellent comedy. Think of it. A nation spends 30 years openly threatening the Great Satan (USA) while our leaders and diplomats play little reindeer games.
If all else fails, I’m certain a strongly worded letter to the Iranians will do the trick, eh?
Electing a dirty moslem communist traitor could affect the world economy too.
We did that.
So let’s try nuking Iran.
An Iranian nuclear bomb exploding in outerspace could destroy the world economy. But don’t blame Iran. Blame Israel./s
Then he fell asleep and dreamt that his nose hairs had grown extremely long, and every time he twitched his nose, it swished this way and that and swatted flies that were bothering him. Somewhere behind him, the rest of him was eating grass and whinnying.
Both an Iranian nuke over Israel OR an Israeli nuke over Iran will affect the world economy too, but that’s where the similarities end.
An Iranian nuke over Israel moves the world towards anarchy, injustice, dishonor, and murder.
I suspect that any Israeli nuke over Iran would be done in such a way, showing Iranian intentions prior to doing it, would move the world towards justice, honor and a brighter future. And, to quote Winnie, where the world will be able to “plan and build in justice, in tradition, and in freedom a house of many mansions where there will be room for all.”
Panetta said the United States believed the most effective way to confront Iran still was to use diplomatic pressure and sanctions
Yeah go with that. It usually works real well!
We are governed by IDIOTS........
I don’t think Israel would use nukes to counter Iranian nuclear threats. Bunker-buster bombs and sabotage, perhaps a land invasion, would do the trick. It’s the land invasion and getting the bunker-busters over there that give me a headache.
The end result will be the same. If Iran gets nukes, it will use them to either destroy Israel, or detonate them in orbit and thereby destroy the West and Israel together by neutralizing their technological infrastructure with the resultant EMP.
Failure to strike the Iranian nuclear program in time will impact the world economy far more - starting with Tel Aviv but followed by New York and London soon after that.
and that $200.00 a barrel oil would create many oilfield jobs.
Not in the United States, apparently. We have WAY too many snail darters and rare newts. It is MUCH better that we live in a pristine environment, perfect in every way, and have to learn Chinese because they own us. BTW, does anybody think China wont strip mine their way from California to Rhode Island once they have the deeds?
$200.00 Bbl would be conservative...
If Iran acquires nukes, then its nutty enough to attack targets in Israel, Europe or the US. What’s the impact to the world economy then Leon??
I’m sure in the runup to WWII, there were shortsighted idiots in Britain and France who said that standing up to Germany would impact the European economy. Of course, that paled in comparison to the impact of a World War.
Israel is not in a position to invade Iran via land. And neither are we. It would be about 10X worse than Iraq.
The disruption would be brief and the recovery up and to the right...
Yeah? Then I'm all for coming back every year or two to make the point "you will not have a nuclear arsenal or capability"
That might be what it takes. So if nobody is in a position to do it, somebody had better get in the position, and suffer whatever it takes. A nuclear armed Iran would also wreak havoc with the global economy and regional stability. You guys have the carriers and the navy pilots, not to mention the ground forces. So long as you’re pulling out of Iraq, send a few over thataway. We’ll back you up;-)
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
Yes, irrespective of how one reads the headline. I suspect an Israeli counterstrike to an Iranian wmd attack would have far greater economic impact than a preemptive strike on Iran. Wonder if Leon has given any thought to the economic no strike scenario. Simply let Iran go nuclear and dominate the oil producers of the region. Probably not, he's too busy worrying about the threat from India
Panetta knows that when he meets with Barak, it’s his job to restrain Israel. So he’ll say - well, whatever. Who knows what kind of blackmail will be going on behind closed doors.
Better yet, set back their capability for a year or two at most, and in that interim, work like hell to undermine their regime. Give covert aid to the students, to the Kurds, and cultivate a few other dissident groups to tear down the Mullahs from within. Don’t decry your own fifth columnists, emulate them.