U.S. strike on Iran really 'inconceivable'? - WND

This is an important must read article. It contains details most of the media has failed to report. Here are a few excerpts:

Not declaring all "nuclear materials" is merely a violation of the Safeguards Agreement. Diverting "nuclear materials" to the production of nukes is a violation of the Treaty. ...

IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei will report that Iran has been fully cooperating and has made complete disclosures. ...

The IAEA uncovered some past failures – of the sort it recently uncovered in South Korea – to promptly and fully declare all "nuclear materials." But there are no outstanding issues to be resolved. The IAEA has found no indication that Iran has diverted or attempted to divert "nuclear materials" to the production of nukes. Therefore, there is no NPT violation for the IAEA Board to refer to the Security Council. ...

A senior U.S. diplomat – who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity – said that even if the IAEA Board balks, the United States will still seek a referral to the Security Council – based on Iran's "past record of deception on its nuclear activities" – and that the matter could be referred to the council "in different ways." ...

But, absent an NPT violation, it appears that Bolton will have to convince the Security Council that Iran's safeguarded nuclear programs constitute a "threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression." If he can do that, then it will be up to the Security Council to "make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security."

Under Article 41, the Security Council may "call upon the members to impose complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations."

Under Article 42 the Security Council may conclude that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate. It may then call upon members to take "such action by air, sea or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security."

If Iran refuses to accede to U.S. demands that they "suspend" the nuclear energy programs – which the NPT gives them an "inalienable right" to have – Bolton has reportedly written his counterparts in Paris, London and Berlin that he "expects" them to back his request for "action by the Security Council." ...

Well, apparently the neo-crazies are seriously considering launching – or condoning – a pre-emptive strike against Iran's safeguarded facilities, in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter.

Perhaps that is what prompted British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw to declare this week that such an attack was "inconceivable." "I don't see any circumstances in which military action would be justified against Iran, full stop." more

US military action must be a last resort. Military action will likely turn the Iranian people against the US. Although the Iranian people are pro-US they are even more pro-Iranian. Lets hope our leaders are correctly reading the extent of the threat. We are living in dangerous times.

Have we waited too long to support the people of Iran in overthrowing their unpopular government? I hope not. As Michael Ledden has been saying repeatedly to the US administration, "Faster please."


TO SEE ALL THE MAJOR NEWS ON IRAN, CLICK HERE!