U.S. Warns Iran To Back Down

Washington Rules Out Direct Talks With Tehran; Sends Second Carrier Group To Gulf

(CBS/AP)  A second U.S. aircraft carrier strike group now steaming toward the Middle East is Washington's way of warning Iran to back down in its attempts to dominate the region, a top U.S. diplomat said here Tuesday.

Nicholas Burns, U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs, ruled out direct negotiations with Iran and said a rapprochement between Washington and Tehran was "not possible" until Iran halts uranium enrichment.

"The Middle East isn't a region to be dominated by Iran. The Gulf isn't a body of water to be controlled by Iran. That's why we've seen the United States station two carrier battle groups in the region," Burns said in an address to the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center, an influential think-tank.

"Iran is going to have to understand that the United States will protect its interests if Iran seeks to confront us," Burns continued.

Iran is in a standoff with the West over its defiance of U.N. demands to halt uranium enrichment, which can produce fuel for both nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. Iran says its atomic program is aimed solely at generating energy, but the United States and some of its allies suspect it is geared toward making weapons. The U.N. imposed limited sanctions on Iran last month.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused the United States Tuesday of stirring up conflict between rival Muslim sects to maintain U.S. influence in the Middle East.

"The U.S. intends to cause insecurity and dispute and weaken independent governments in the region to continue with its dominance over the Middle East and achieve its arrogant goals," Ahmadinejad said during a meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem.

"The U.S. and Zionist regime have a conspiracy to stir up conflict between Shiite and Sunni Muslims in order to plunder the wealth of the regional nations," the president said, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency, or IRNA.

Ahmadinejad said last week that Iran is "ready for anything" in its confrontation with the United States.

"Iran is accusing the U.S. of intensifying sectarian violence as a way of diverting attention from its missile tests and defiance of the U.N., but the White House's reaction – sending more aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf – has congressional leaders worried about a possible military response," said CBS News foreign affairs analyst Pamela Falk.

Iran conducted missile tests on Monday, the first of five days of military maneuvers southeast of Tehran.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said the U.S. buildup in the Gulf was intended to impress on Iran that the four-year war in Iraq has not made America vulnerable.

The American aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis and several accompanying ships are heading toward the Gulf to join an aircraft carrier group already in the region, the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower. The Stennis is expected to arrive in late February.

The Stennis's arrival in the Middle East will mark the first time since the U.S.-led Iraq invasion in 2003 that the United States has had two carrier battle groups in the region.

The U.S. Navy said Tuesday that the minesweeper USS Gladiator arrived in the Persian Gulf, one of six such ships — four American, two British — now plying the Gulf for anti-ship mines. U.S. officials have long said Iran was likely to block busy Gulf shipping lanes in a conflict.

Some among the audience of Dubai-based diplomats and analysts complained that American wars in the Middle East were already threatening the region's stability and asked Burns to sort out Iraq and the Israel-Palestinian conflict before turning attention to Iran.

"What we are not interested in is another war in the region," Mohammed al-Naqbi, who heads the Gulf Negotiations Center, told Burns. "Iraq is your problem, not the problem of the Arabs. You destroyed a country that had institutions. You handed that country to Iran. Now you are crying to Europe and the Arabs to help you out of this mess."

Burns' speech appeared to respond to similar comments by Iranian officials in Dubai and Bahrain last month. In December, Iran's top national security adviser, Ali Larijani, appealed to Gulf Arabs to shut down American bases on their soil and instead join Iran in a regional security alliance.

[waltzbmw30]

What really matters is our security. There have been huge mistakes made in the war in Iraq. Bush admits to his failures there. The only thing that could be more devastating to our country than the mistakes we've already made is to lose in Iraq. We need to push forward, if we don't, the men and women that have lost their lives there have done so with no purpose. Our military knows what they are fighting for far better than any journalist or ordinary civilian.

As for Iran, they aren't going anywhere physically is correct, but if we hesitate on stopping their nuclear progression they will advance it and by the time we do something it would be too late. They have thousands even hundreds of thousands of individuals ready to die for "their cause". They have an apocalyptic view on the world and would love to kill millions of Americans. They teach that hate in their schools and in their churches. Don't be fooled by what you hear in the news. Iran doesn't want to talk; they just want to divert our attention with propaganda so that they can progress on their true agenda; KILLING ALL OF US.

[legendary240]

MICK makes sense - kudos MICK

[legendary240]

I am Christian - I don't hate you - why bring that up? I defer to you; pretend you are Presdent - TELL us what you would do? There are real threats out there, what is the proper response to them? I'm listening.

[nothappyatall]

Thing is, we don't have a viable military to send, they are all in Iraq on 3rd and 4th rotations, exhausted, and the impending attack on IRAN is exactly WHY Bush wants this troop surge and exactly why he has refused to set a withdrawl timetable or bring troops home- he planned all along to invade IRAN once he provokes them into action- ANY action to defend themselves which BUSH will take as a "threat to US interests" and order an immediate attack.

You watch and see if this scenario don't come down the pike exactly as I say.
You christian bast@rd RIGHTWINGERS are the ones who voted this moron not only into office but BACK in a second time because you LUVED his anti abortion anti gay agenda, now you'll see where that gets us very soon!

[nothappyatall]

Thing is, we don't have a viable military to send, they are all in Iraq on 3rd and 4th rotations, exhausted, and the impending attack on IRAN is exactly WHY Bush wants this troop surge and exactly why he has refused to set a withdrawl timetable or bring troops home- he planned all along to invade IRAN once he provokes them into action- ANY action to defend themselves which BUSH will take as a "threat to US interests" and order an immediate attack.

You watch and see if this scenario don't come down the pike exactly as I say.
You christian *** RIGHTWINGERS are the ones who voted this moron not only into office but BACK in a second time because you LUVED his anti abortion anti gay agenda, now you'll see where that gets us very soon!

[nothappyatall]

"Nicholas Burns, U.S. undersecretary of state for political affairs, ruled out direct negotiations with Iran"

There you go, the Bush regime is doing all it can to ENSURE we will go to war now with Iran, first provoking them further by making threats and sending a war ship there, and now by refusing to hold talks.

Get ready for WW3 and the impending collapse of the US economy, as predicted some say by Nostradamus long ago.

[bluestardad]

It is common knowledge that Iraqi units are infiltrated by all types of Insurgents, Terrorist, and Execution Death Squads members of Both Religions. Those people who support this Surge of Troops in Iraq are forcing American Soldiers to sleep with the enemy in small units exposing them to undue kidnap threat. Americans soldiers who are captured by these enemies are without mercy, tortured and mutilated beyond recognition by their captors. Still our political leadership are planning to send these Brave Men and Women in to this environment. If American proceeds with this deployment and breaks down small American Units to live and work with these Iraqi Death Squad Units our troops will be kidnapped and handed over to such beheadings, torture and captivity as has never been seen before on Cable, Internet, and National Television. If you support this surge in troops and the tactics it brings you are responsible for every one of these deaths.

[bluestardad]

The Checks in the Mail! Gulf of Tonken is coming!

[tbweb]

Nothing is going to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons at this point especially since the North Koreans are now helping them develop their own underground test. A military conflict with Iran seems inevitable, but it's not urgent, we can engage Iran on our terms at a date of our choosing. Lets back off and finish dealing with Iraq and Afghanistan first, the US can't be split over 3 or 4 conflicts at this point. The US needs to build a coalition of nations to deal with these world issues and stop letting other nations sit on the sidelines while the US goes it alone! It's time for our military to regroup, rebuild and get stronger before confronting Iran. I think the US can take Iran even now, but why stress our military to do it. Iran isn't going anywhere, we can deal with them later and we should!

[acauble1]

SS-N-22 'Sunburn' anti-ship missile

Tor-M1 anit-air missile

... Both are modern advancements of the Russian military arms industry and now in the hands of Iran. The U.S. has nothing to counter these missiles at this time, NOTHING! We may have technological advantages in some areas of our military when compared to Iran, shear size being one of them. In previous reports from non-U.S. news sources, Russia and China had vowed to help defend Iran under any attack. If Bush starts another front with Iran, it will look like a duel, except we ended up bringing a knife to a gun fight!

[mick7744]

A lot of you are alluding to another Gulf of Tonkin-type incident. That sort of deception may not even be required in this case. With Bush goading him, this whacko little Ahmadinejad thingee might just do it on his own and save Bush and his minions the trouble of contriving an incident in order to justify yet another profitable war%u2026profitable that is,for themselves and their masters. Shaping public opinion is something the Bush administration has shown itself to be very inept at (along with just about everything else other than deconstructing the Constitution)

As much as I hold the draft-dodging, thieving, treasonous moron Bush in total disdain, something does have to be done about preventing a nuclear Iran. This mad dog cannot be permitted to have the bomb.

D*mn...but I hate agreeing with Bush even that much, although I have to admit he has worked very hard to bring about this crisis.

If we do slam Iran, I hope we do it with air and naval power and stop worrying about inflicting democracy on people forever stuck in the good old days of the 7th century. Also...forget about their hearts and minds. It's much too small a target!

[tibu987]

Answer this for me, will you.
In Dubai and Abu Dhabi, about a trillion dollars, yes, that is a trillion dolllars is being spent on the world's largest entertainment center in the world. The world's tallest bldgs., largest casinos, largest amusement centers, largest airports, largest airlines, highest control tower, the largest and highest everything, all surpassing anything we have in the U.S.
Now, my question is this, why would they be doing all this with terrorism surrounding them, certainly a situation not conducive for tourism.
Who elected the U.S. to get their young soldiers killed, spend untold billions to try to destroy terrorism in their own backyard.
I am missing something very important here. Why in the world would all that be going on at thus time of such great turmoil in their adjacent countries? And, it is all done by their Arab brothers.
Am I the only one to see the inconguity of this situation?
Are there any Americans, politicians or others, financially involved in these grandiose plans.
Who are the American companies gaining financially from these large construction projects?
I see too many things wrong in this scenario.
Anyone out there have any thoughts about this?

[ndjam]

We are now protecting Saudi Arabia.. The U.S may eventually attack Iran if Saudi Arabia gives us the green light. So once again the U.S.A will have to fight so that the Saudis can maintain their influence in the middle east. What a world, it is ALL about money.

[thgdriver]

SharnCedar SEZ

the worst military performance in the history of the world. The absolute worst.

I don't mean to split hairs but our military did not lose any of those wars, the politicians in Washington Did.

[sharncedar]

For our trillions and our bragging what are the results? We tied in Korea, lost Vietnam, won Gulf War I, lost Iraq, lost or tied Afganistan. Generoulsy, a 1-2-2 record, which is very horrible for the world's most expensive military by a long shot. Dollar for dollar, the worst military performance in the history of the world. The absolute worst. You can't do worse than 1-2-2 at these prices. We spend $20,000 or something for every American every year, and it buys a string of pathetic military defeats all over the world.

Now they want to attack Iran. What a joke. Are they hoping to get a lucky win, get back to .500? Winners don't count on luck.

[sharncedar]

"If we dropped the pretenses of wanting to be good, we could then occupy Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia without much more trouble."

I know this was tongue-in-cheek, but it is a good parody of what we can call atom bomb hubris - the notion that because you have atom bombs you are somehow good at war. In practice, the United States is such a poor military power that we couldn't successfully occupy a tiny little country with no government at all ... like fer innstance Afganistan. Yet we have an image of ourselves as some great military power.

"Know Thyself" the first precept of war and survival. We have a very inflated image of our military expertise in this country.

An historical analogy might be the Persian army that the Greeks withstood at Thermopylae? An enormous overinflated army with a huge budget but a big loser in actual battle conditions.

[thgdriver]

Ok, random_radar, no more play time with your plastic army men, time for your pill and nap.

Bush is still tellling the rest of the world what to do. Obviously, he never learned that fierce barking is offensive and apt to be resisted at all cost. Perhaps he thinks this will pump up his ratings.
Diplomacy is off the table with this administration...despite the fact that the Baker Group recommended serious negotions with Iran and Syria. Nobody is going to tell Bush how to govern in a better way! He is the decider!!!
Every time he opens his mouth, we get new enemies and hardened terrorists itching to inspire more violence in Iraq and elsewhere. Now it appears Bush is goading Iran maybe with the intention to start a war with them. His presidency has failed and before it is over, he may swamp America in another internecine war.

[random_radar]

Well, if we occupy Iran, we will have an overland route to supply Afghanistan. Plus, we can combine Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan into one large zone of control. And we will control about 25% of the world's oil reserves (counting domestic).

If we dropped the pretenses of wanting to be good, we could then occupy Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia without much more trouble. Then we would control 50% of the oil, eliminate most of the terrorist hotbeds, and eliminate those pesky threats to our Israeli allies.

Sure, we would have to draft a million man army, but the economy could handle it--especially if we financed it with oil revenues from our dominions in the Middle East. With a stranglehold on the world's oil supply, we could dictate terms that OPEC never dreamed of.

Yes, it sounds like a great plan. Today the Middle East, tomorrow the world. America can make Rome, The Mongols, and the British Empire look like small-time operations with the Imperial Glory we could impose upon the world.

[exusmcsgt]

Obviously, the sabre-rattling continues and diplomacy ramains a non-starter with this administration.

It will not be happy until we are at war not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in Iran and Syria as well.

And this bullying, with some, passes for leadership......incredible.