Let me begin by saying that Iran probably needs its butt spanked. In principle. That’s a far cry from necessarily advocating that the US needs to whip out the paddle.

This being said, let’s examine the back and forth over whether or not Dubya is a-fixin’ to encore his wildly successful Operation Whaq Iraq with a new tune he’s working on, “Can Iran.”

First, a look at what the White House has said:

• “The doctrine of prevention is to work together to prevent the Iranians from having a nuclear weapon…”



• “… We hear in Washington, you know, ‘prevention means force.’ It doesn’t mean force necessarily. In this case, it means diplomacy.” (Source.)
• “We’re pursuing a diplomatic solution,” White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said of efforts by European leaders and the United Nations to avert the development of nuclear weapons in Iran. “Our focus is on finding a diplomatic situation.”
• Reports “appear to me to be based on people who do not know the administration’s thinking,” McClellan said at a morning gaggle for reporters at The White House. “It seems… to be based on a lot of wild speculation.”
• “It was just wild speculation,” Bush said today. “What you’re reading is just wild speculation. It happens quite frequently here in the nation’s capital.”
• “Our objective is to prevent them from having a nuclear weapon,” Bush said today. “It doesn’t mean force necessarily.”
• “We do not want Iran to have a nuclear weapon, the capacity to make a nuclear weapon or the knowledge to make a nuclear weapon… That’s our stated goal,” Bush said. “It’s also the goal of our friends and allies… They must give up their nuclear ambitions.
• “One of the decisions I made early on was to have a multinational approach to sending a clear message to the Iranians,” said Bush, pointing to diplomatic efforts that have been led by Britain, Germany and France and also supported by Russia. He also included Russia in that. “I want to emphasize this point. We’re not only making sure they don’t have the means to develop a weapon, but the knowledge.
• “It’s engaging in wild speculation to comment any further about it,” McClellan said, brushing aside questions about any of the planning that might be expected in the context of U.S. relations with Iran at this time. “I don’t tend to get into talking about military planning.”
• “No president takes options off the table,” McClellan said today, as others in the administration and the president himself has said of the question of military action against Iran. (Source.)

Hmmm. Now let’s have a look at what wasn’t said:

• We will not attack Iran.

As a student (and occasional torturer) of language, I love the craftsmanship in so much of what the WH is saying. For instance, “it’s wild speculation” makes no comment at all on the truth of the conclusions. It merely comments on the technique by which a conclusion was reached. It’s certainly, and very specifically, not a denial.

And note the repetition of “necessarily.” I love it. “It doesn’t mean force necessarily.” Which means that it damned well might mean force. Add to that the fact that, yammering about diplomacy (a hallmark of the Bush administration, to be sure) notwithstanding, there seems to be no room for maneuvering on the question of whether Iran can actually have what it wants. It’s like it was with my old girlfriend. I wanted something. She wanted something different. So we compromised. I gave up what I wanted and she got what she wanted. It was a win/win.

Of course, this is all crafted very nicely. It needs to look and feel like “we aren’t warming up the tactical nukes even as we speak” to the casual observer (that’d be the public) while sounding a lot more like “I’ll boot your nards through the top of your head” to the more interested observer (that’d be Iran).

If you read those reports and placed heavy bets against pre-emptive military action, ten points from Griffindor…

:xpost: