Obama Ready to Strike to Stop Iran: Ex-Adviser (Dennis Ross)
By Indira A.R. Lakshmanan - Tue Jan 10 11:41:13 GMT 2012
No one should doubt that President Barack Obama is prepared to use military force to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon if sanctions and diplomacy fail, the presidents former special assistant on Iran said.
Obama has made it very clear that he regards a nuclear- armed Iran as so great a threat to international security that the Iranians should never think that theres a reluctance to use the force to stop them, Dennis Ross, who served two years on Obamas National Security Council and a year as Secretary of State Hillary Clintons special adviser on Iran, said in an interview yesterday.
There are consequences if you act militarily, and theres big consequences if you dont act, said Ross, who in a two- hour interview at the Bloomberg Washington office laid out a detailed argument against those who say Obama would sooner contain a nuclear-armed Iran than strike militarily.
The administration considers the risks of permitting a nuclear-armed Iran to be greater than the risks of military action, said Ross, who last month rejoined the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a research group.
MORE...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-10/obama-prepared-to-use-force-to-stop-nuclear-iran-former-adviser-ross-says.html
rocktivity
(44,577 posts)I'm not saying that this ex-adviser is wrong -- I'm just saying that this ex-adviser is an EX-ADVISER!!!
rocktivity
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Part of the "diplomacy". An ex-adviser puts it out there that the US would strike just as a kind of backdoor warning to make Iran think twice about it. Pretty sneaky/smart if it is.
RC
(25,592 posts)Those people that think we do need to do so, need to study history for the reason why Iran feels the need to go nuclear in the first place. Another case where violence is begetting violence and the answer for some is more violence.
If we had left them alone back in 1953, would they be doing this now? Most likely not. Just like Iraq will come back to extract its revenge from us in a couple of generations.
Tempest
(14,591 posts)Says all I need to know about Ross.
The establishment of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) in 1985 greatly expanded the pro-Israel lobby's influence over policy as well. WINEP's founding director, Martin Indyk, had previously been research director of AIPAC which, then as now, focuses much of its efforts on Congress. Indyk developed WINEP into a highly effective think tank devoted to maintaining and strengthening the US-Israel alliance through advocacy in the media and lobbying the executive branch.
The result was the 1993 Oslo Declaration of Principles.
Thus, the adoption of WINEP's policy recommendation to "resist pressures for a procedural breakthrough" by both the Bush and Clinton administrations delayed the start of meaningful Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, contributed to the demonization of the PLO and multiplied the casualty rate of the first Palestinian intifada.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Washington_Institute_for_Near_East_Policy
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)Picking a fight with Iran is stupidity which would make the Iraq invasion look like the most brilliant military operation is U.S. history.
Attacking Iran is a quick way to push oil to $200 a barrel in about a week. Yeah, what Obama wants to help the economy is $7.00/gallon gasoline.
AndyTiedye
(23,500 posts)Tempest
(14,591 posts)And as you said, if you could find it.
It would also cause our military machine to stop dead in its tracks.
alp227
(32,060 posts)Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)then we deserve it.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)DeathToTheOil
(1,124 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)FrenchieCat
(68,867 posts)No one cares about what the Administration says....
only what others rumor it "may" do "if".....
You know how that goes, doncha?
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)Response to Purveyor (Original post)
undercraticground This message was self-deleted by its author.