Finger. Meet wind.
Atrios catches former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich making dramatic changes in his rhetoric about how the United States should respond to Iran. Someone is rather suddenly poo-poohing the idea of a military attack.
Recently in Iran Category
Steve Clemons is concerned about where we may be headed in our confrontation with Iran. He writes:
But Burns and Bolton are laying track -- no doubt about it -- and that track may take us back to a military option in the end, and that option, if triggered, could punctuate the end of American primacy in global affairs, particularly if outraged Middle East oil states band together, even in part, with China and Russia in a new, global stand-off regarding global rules, global finance, and the control and management of global strategic resources.
If this story proves true, I think we can drop all of the pretense about how nothing is more important to the Bush Administration than fighting weapons of mass destruction.
Jane Hamsher quotes tonight's report by MSNBC's David Shuster:
Intelligence sources say Valerie Wilson was part of an operation three years ago tracking the proliferation of nuclear weapons material into Iran. And the sources allege that when Mrs. Wilson’s cover was blown, the administration’s ability to track Iran’s nuclear ambitions was damaged as well.
Christy Harvey at Think Progress compares statements made by President George W. Bush about Iraq and Iran. As she explains:
As they say, it’s deja vu, all over again.
