Clinton: US ‘Not Setting Deadlines’ for Iran
Israeli war hawks seem to have buckled to a firm US position of favoring talks and sanctions over military action
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday said the US is “not setting deadlines” for Iran and still considers negotiations as “by far the best approach” to confront Iran’s nuclear program.
The past week or so has seen a shift in the dominant narrative on Iran. With US leaders convinced that Iran has not made the decision to develop nuclear weapons and also that a preventive military strike would backfire, Israel was growing frustrated and threatened to strike unilaterally.
But last week Israeli leaders appeared to give in to the US position, saying tough US postures may have eliminated the need to perform a unilateral strike.
Still, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has reiterated that the harsh US-led economic sanctions crippling Iran’s economy are having no effect on Iranian policy vis-à-vis continued uranium enrichment, “because [Iran] doesn’t see a clear red line from the international community.”
Asked if the Obama administration will issue sharper “red lines” threatening military consequences consequences for reach a deal in negotiations by a certain date, Clinton said, “We’re not setting deadlines.”
“We’re watching very carefully about what they do, because it’s always been more about their actions than their words,” Clinton said.
Last 5 posts by John Glaser
- Contra GOP, Obama Is Not Rolling Back Terror War - May 26th, 2013
- House Committee Prohibits Pentagon Base Closures - May 23rd, 2013
- Code Pink's Medea Benjamin Interrupts Obama Speech - May 23rd, 2013
- Obama Admits US Killed 4 Americans in Drone War - May 22nd, 2013
- CIA to Continue Waging Drone War in Pakistan - May 21st, 2013
MoT
September 10th, 2012 at 7:51 am
There she goes again!… Encircling a nation with a ring of bases and naval ships and starving its people isn't "threatening". Somebody get hold of the local loony bin because I fear once more there's a cell missing it's occupant.
for sight
September 10th, 2012 at 9:12 am
Wait and see what Israel gets in terms of money, weapons, and promised vetos from Obama for NOT attacking BEFORE the election. It will be very expensive. Look what Obama promised Israel for a two month suspension on settlements in the west bank before the mid-term elections- free F-35 fighter jets.
ML3
September 10th, 2012 at 9:37 am
Hillary shouldn't worry. The sanctions are doing enough damage to the average Iranian…wonder how much love will be left for America afterwards.
whiskeypapa
September 10th, 2012 at 11:14 am
Fear of Iran's nuclear development is just a pretext.
Presently oil is traded in two oil bouses one in New York and the the other in London. All trade is conducted in US dollars. Countries that wish to trade fro oil must have a reserve of US greenbacks. If oil is traded for other than US currency as Iran is doing on a limited scale, it would devalue the US dollar and all those reserve funds will come back as so much wall-paper.
Iran threatens the hegemony of the US dollar.
james
September 10th, 2012 at 11:44 am
I firmly believe that the current position of the US administration stems from very heavy pressure by the military which still contains some patriots who do not like to see their beloved country subverted by zio war mongers. If I am mistaken, why the sudden u-turn just before the elections?
Or the other less likely explanation is that public support for such a war is actually very low, but the traitorous MSM is not reporting. We are really living in interesting times.
pendulum
September 10th, 2012 at 1:03 pm
Shrillery's new secret weapon, Canada, hey you up there – pull your guy in Iran, that will make them quake. too bad the new weapon is firing blanks
Johnny_Warbucks
September 10th, 2012 at 1:49 pm
How very reassuring. We all feel soooooo much better now.
mojo
September 10th, 2012 at 9:29 pm
Look Iran is not producing any nuclear bomb/s, their atomic technology is for the time when the Persian oil dried out by 2050, you know it so Israel and England and even the Swedish neo fascist government and Rasmussen the Danish head of the NATO knows it. So stop playing POLITICS with peoples life.
davidgrayling
September 10th, 2012 at 9:37 pm
Shrillery dances around the world like a mad witch. Which way she dances depends on her audience.
She is double-jointed and can contort her body into any shape she desires. She can talk in tongues while dancing without a misstep. Her shadow can detach itself. Her tongue is reptilian.
In earlier times she would've been burned as a witch or dunked into a duckpond!
katty wompus
September 10th, 2012 at 10:00 pm
How very expensive? More expensive than a war?
katty wompus
September 10th, 2012 at 10:14 pm
The brass has been against this Iran war idea for a very long time. The top brass has always given lip service of agreement to the warmonger-in-chief, while never seeming very gung-ho.
Bush/Cheney seemed to truly relish poking a stick at the Iranians (real men want to go to Teheran!), with Clinton and now Obama are a hair more subdued. $10 gas is bad for incumbents.
Alas, The Lobby must be placated as both parties quiver like scared Jell-O when Israel barks.
Keeps the Defense Industry real happy too.
What a neat idea. (See Col. North; Iran-Contra) The US borrows money from China it will never repay, to launder it through the US economy on its way to Israel.
katty wompus
September 10th, 2012 at 10:16 pm
Isn't that the Job Description for any Secretary of State?
richard vajs
September 11th, 2012 at 9:34 am
The woman lies as well as Bibi. Almost worth voting Romney in to see her go – of course, that means the flaming as—le Bolton will take her place. Six of one, half dozen of the other…….
deliaruhe
September 11th, 2012 at 11:34 am
"… it’s always been more about their actions than their words,” Clinton said."
Well, she's got that right. Someone should create an encylopaedia of all the stupidities uttered by both the Iranians and the Israelis over this issue. If words were bombs, they'd both be flattened by now.