Panetta: Iran Strike Could Impact World Economy

Arutz Sheva ^ | 18/11/11 | Elad Benari

[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, “I’ve 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.”

......

[Eleutheria5]

Wow. Such profound insights. Such vision. I really told them something that time. The world economy is a good thing. Impacting it is a bad thing. Imagine that. ZZZZZZZ

[Moonman62]

Nuke Qom from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

[Blado]

Yeah, ya think? ... like the Nazis and Commies and WWII?

Panneta (Italian for little piece of bread?) = FAIL

[Rummyfan]

[Rummyfan]

Pannetta: just another Clinton retread.

[trumandogz]

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.

[CitizenUSA]

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.

[AmericanInTokyo]

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said on Thursday he would raise American concerns about the unintended consequences of any nuclear development and military action by Iran upon Israel, during his upcoming meeting with Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Reuters reported

THERE. FIXED IT.

[CitizenUSA]

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.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=reindeer%20games

[CitizenUSA]

If all else fails, I’m certain a strongly worded letter to the Iranians will do the trick, eh?

[AmericanInTokyo]

Bump!

[LyinLibs]

Electing a dirty moslem communist traitor could affect the world economy too.

We did that.

So let’s try nuking Iran.

[American Constitutionalist]

" 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. "

Where necessity is the mother of invention, in this case, necessity would be the mother of priority.
Only then will the USA realize that we have the know how, the resources, will, if we are only allowed to drill and produce our own oil reserves will we know that the USA has all the necessary petroleum resources on our on borders to sustain our selves.

[Eleutheria5]

An Iranian nuclear bomb exploding in outerspace could destroy the world economy. But don’t blame Iran. Blame Israel./s

[Eleutheria5]

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.

[C210N]

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.”

[SECURE AMERICA]

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........

[Eleutheria5]

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.

[Truth29]

A charitable view of these comments is that they are just more of the endless diplospeak where process is confused with goals. A more sinister interpretation is that this is preparation for Obama getting Israel destroyed and most of the Jews killed to help his coreligionists.