Why Bush folded on Iran
Salon.com / Juan Cole
01-Aug-2008 (2 comments)

July 31, 2008 | Pundits and diplomats nearly got whiplash from the double take they did when George W. Bush sent the No. 3 man in the State Department to sit at a table on July 19 across from an Iranian negotiator, without any preconditions. When Bush had addressed the Israeli Knesset in May, he made headlines by denouncing any negotiation with "terrorists and radicals" as "the false comfort of appeasement." What drove W. to undermine John McCain by suddenly adopting Barack Obama's foreign policy prescription on Iran?

In recent months, several major developments have strengthened the case for dealing with Iran diplomatically rather than militarily. The U.S. military is more overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan than ever. The resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the tribal areas of northwest Pakistan has required a significant increase in the number of U.S. and NATO troops during the past year. Iranian proxies in Iraq and Afghanistan could easily target U.S. bases with Katyusha rockets in retaliation for any U.S. strike on the nuclear research facilities at Natanz near Isfahan.

recommended by News Goffer



Its not all about oil

by Alborzi (not verified) on

Its mostly about oil, but also Americans realized that Iran is not as easy as Iraq and Afghanistan and they do not have the energy of before. As they say "pashmeshoon rikhteh"


USA lost image!

by ali reza (not verified) on

I remember many years ago when the world counted on USA.When USA said something it was the truth.She would stay the course no matter what.She also would not change her mind.When USA can not make up her mind about what to do with a country like Iran,other countries would take notice.I guess this must be a sign of times and follow suite.