To: GUSTAVE JAEGER who wrote (8260 ) 9/16/2004 8:18:57 AM From: sea_urchin Respond to of 20039 Gus > The Iran/Israel conflagration, a history. Strange kind of history to pre-empt events which haven't yet happened. Maybe the news isn't exciting enough for Mr Salhani?news.ft.com >>The Bush administration's warnings that it will not "tolerate" a nuclear-armed Iran have opened up a lively policy debate in Washington over the merits of military strikes against the Islamic republic's nuclear programme. Analysts close to the administration say military options are under consideration, but have not reached a level of seriousness that indicate the US is preparing actual action. Gary Schmitt, executive director of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neo-conservative think-tank, says that with "enough intelligence and spadework", the US could "do a good job" of slowing Iran's programme for a while. But, he cautions, the Bush administration would need a "game plan" for the aftermath. That long-term approach is lacking, analysts say, and has floundered in the debate over "regime change". Asked whether Israel would take military action if the US dithered, Mr Schmitt replied: "Absolutely. No government in Israel will let this pass ultimately." Tom Donnelly, an analyst with PNAC and the American Enterprise Institute, says that while inflicting military damage is possible, the consequences rule out this option. If the US started down the military road, it would have to consider going the whole way to invasion and occupation. << Anyway, if it happens, this will be the second war that Israel has drawn the US into.ipsnews.net >>Iraq under Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat to the United States but it did to Israel, which is one reason why Washington invaded the Arab country, according to a speech made by a member of a top-level White House intelligence group. <<