You must be politically naive to think that CIA and MOSSAD are not active in Iran.

Have you studied this link?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14095

If you have, please let me know what you think.

So far, American government has lost nearly 5000 soldiers, spent over 900 billion dollars, killed, and maimed over one million Iraqis?

This is the price American government is prepared to pay in order to change a regime in Iraq and replace it by a puppet government to look after the interests of US and Israel in the region, now you are suggesting that USA and Israel are not involved with has happened in Iran.

Panner: please wake up

To American government, “Iran” is worth far more than “Iraq”

USA and Israel are aware that an attack on Iran will have “catastrophic consequences”; instead, and for the time being, The CIA and Mossad plan for Iran is an agenda to maintain division and instability.

According to your logic, Iraqi people must blame themselves for what happened to their country and not the USA.

In the same token, British and American stole oil from Iran for 70 long years(from 1909 to 1979) and toppled the democratically elected Dr Mohammad Mosadegh, again according to your logic, Iranian must not blame the British and Americans and should only blame themselves, this is absurd.

Regimes come and go and you have the right to be against IRI, but do not scarify “Iran” for the sake of your ideology. The threat from USA and Israel is real.

If you consider the Mullas to be your enemy and the USA, the enemy of Mullas, please always remember this:

The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.

And you’re right. the more I spend on this site, the more I realize, it is an echochamber and noone is really interested in new perspective and ideas, only short-term profiteering…

If Iran comes through February with only cosmetic or no sanctions, then it will have won this round. I disagree that a US attack next year is likely. Iran’s influence is only growing in the region. Barring a major turnaround in Afghanistan and a rollback of Iranian influence in Iraq, the US will be loath to attack without suffering a considerable counter attack in the region.

The rarely posed pertinent question is how are US regional interests best served in the region ? The core US interest is securing the free flow of oil and gas from the region. It is clear that attacking Iran at present goes against this interest.

Ultimately the options are to (1) bring Iran in from the cold (2) reduce Iran’s ability to counter. The current “sanctions” holding pattern is time limited, because if Iran becomes “near nuclear weapons” capable, option (2) is completely negated.

As time goes by the US negotiating position deteriorates – unless some major unforseen internal or external Iranian (or US) event occurs.

Thus, I think that if Iran comes through February relatively unscathed, Obama – and the United States – will finally parlay with Iran.

http://www.iranian.com/main/blog/jahanshah-javid/its-us-not-them

This is not 1953 or 1979.

You need to read the book “A century of War”by William Engdhal as I suggested before…

LOL. Do you talk to Obama persoanlly?? I don’t think Obama sees it that way and his rhetoric and policies so far attest to that notion. Obama actually does not suffer from covert bigotry…

There will be no deal…Deal with it.

We will remember who stood with the Iranians people and who didn’t.

What’s driving it all? In my opinion the US is at a tipping point. It can go one way – more of the same, which is propping up corrupt oil-rich Arab dictatorships coupled with unconditional support of Israel and their strategic pre-eminence, focusing on a bogus but necessary Islamic threat embodied by Iran, an arrangement which would be entrenched for decades by a new war.

Or it can go the other. Rapprochement with Iran, accepting and embracing Islamic politics, energy security through friendly trade-based arrangements rather than through anti-democratic oppressive regional policy, neutralising the ridiculous servility to Israeli interests and freeing the US to act independently and in its own interests.

I genuinely believe Obama understands these options, and what’s more, I believe he genuinely wants to find a way to get the Israeli rod off his back. He is, by and large, inscrutable on these issues but the way in which he responded to Netanyahu giving him the finger over the settlements suggests which way he wants to go. Unfortunately, the lack of an agreement with Iran so far seems to have frustrated him. So much so, Netanyahu thinks he has killed off the Obama threat. In fact, he is practically dancing on its grave. But if Obama pulls off a deal with Iran, the game changes.

I would encourage people to speculate on the US’ motivation. Election fraud is not a cause for war. Charges of an Iranian nuke program has no legs per IAEA and US intelligence. Every casus belli trumpeted by the US is full of holes, just like every rationale for war in Iraq.

What exactly is the US trying to accomplish? Is the whole Iranian gambit merely a US government fronted operation for some one else’s gain (Israel, oil companies, military contractors, etc.) Or is there something strategic that the US is trying to accomplish but refuses to tell anyone about?

The strategic importance of Iran is the part being left out of the discussion in favor of hot button stuff that plays well in the US media. The discussion needs to focus on strategic issues, not the “made for TV” narrative.

I say it’s all about control of Europe, India, and China’s energy resources at the spigot. What say you? Is that worth another $Trillion war, borrowed from China?

Please click on the link below, which is both interesting and fascinating;

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14095

An attack on Iran will not cause as much of a rally around the flag as the attack on Iraq did, but after the consequences become apparent, it will cause more damage to its architects than the Iraq war did, though the Iraq war disgraced former US President Bush.

Compared to Iraq, the faction favoring attacking Iran has done a signally poor job preparing the US population. The US military also speaks as a consensus against an attack, which was not the case with Iraq.

I do not see Obama under substantial political pressure to attack or sanction Iran except from pro-Israel constituencies.