Iran Unlikely to Strike First, U.S. Official Says

[Purveyor]

By Tony Capaccio - Thu Feb 16 16:26:39 GMT 2012

The Iranian military is unlikely to intentionally provoke a conflict with the West, the top U.S. military intelligence official said today.

Lieutenant General Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said Iran probably has the ability to “temporarily close the Strait of Hormuz with its naval forces,” as some Iranian officials have threatened to do if attacked or in response to sanctions on its oil exports by the U.S. and European Union.

“Iran has also threatened to launch missiles against the United States and our allies in the region in response to an attack,” Burgess said in testimony at a hearing today of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “It could also employ its terrorist surrogates worldwide. However, it is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict or launch a preemptive attack.”

Iran has the capability to strike regional and European targets with its ballistic missiles and is seeking to improve their accuracy, Burgess said in the latest U.S. public assessment of Iran’s military prowess. Iran’s regional military capability continues to improve, with new ships and submarines and expanded bases in the Gulf of Oman, Persian Gulf and Caspian Sea, he said.

MORE...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-16/iran-unlikely-to-strike-first-in-conflict-u-s-intelligence-official-says.html

[FedUp_Queer]

1. Given all of the actions we've taken,

haven't we already struck first?

[saras]

4. A hundred times over, for many decades.

[gordianot]

2. Nuclear envy in the mideast first cousin of dreadnaught envy from another time in South America.

Only problem given tempers in the region someone can get really burnt.

[FiveGoodMen]

3. "We, on the other hand, can hardly wait!" he added.

[leveymg]

5. The only honest assessments we get about Iran are from the Pentagon.

This goes back to the big pushback from the Pentagon brass when the Bush-Cheney Whitehouse wanted to "fall forward" into Iran in 2006-07.

The irony is that the State Department has been the branch pushing hardest toward war, at least publicly. A lot of neocons at State.

[Fool Count]

6. How many billions of dollars did go into the awesome analytical powers behind

that conclusion?

[Earth_First]

7. Well of course not. That position is reserved to the United States... n/t

[Javaman]

8. The equivelent of Iran "striking first" would be...

suicide by cop.

[Monty22001]

12. And that never happens right?

hmm..

[ronnie624]

13. It's a flawed analogy.

Iran has done nothing to warrant being considered a suspect, and the U.S. is far from being a cop.

On the contrary, for most of living memory, the U.S. has been the single biggest violator of international law. Our government's body count alone, shows this conclusively. It is the U.S. that is in violation of the NPT as well, as it specifically forbids coercion for the purpose of arbitrarily denying other signatories the rights guaranteed therein.

[Gringostan]

9. Neocons want this war

The only people wanting this war are the neocons in the US and Israeli governments.

[Purveyor]

10. And I'm convinced their major motive is the defeat of President Obama, not the fear of

the Iranian nuclear program.

[Gringostan]

14. That too... N/T

[ronnie624]

11. "Iran’s known nuclear activities

are monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency, and there are no reports of enriched uranium being diverted from those facilities for weapons use."

[Nihil]

15. Stop press: "top U.S. military intelligence official" found dead from natural causes

"Bloomberg strongly apologise for implying that their pro-war article could possibly
provoke any preemptive activitity from either Israel or the USA. It was purely a
financial arrangement."