. . ."Of course, it's quite obvious that the Biden administration never wanted the "element of surprise" at all. Biden has simply been continuing the Obama-era policy of appeasement." . . . "Iran got the notice it needed to allow Biden to appear to respond to the deaths of three U.S. troops without any meaningful consequences to Iran." . . .
Matt Margolis – PJ Media . . ."Biden has been talking tough with Iran for many, many weeks, and Iran has repeatedly proven that it is not deterred by his words. But the moment troops were killed, Biden was suddenly under pressure to respond with more than just idle threats. And he did promise a response.
"And then promptly broadcast those plans to Iran.
Sources within the administration leaked the details of potential moves by the administration to Politico.
"Within the administration, top aides are trying to thread a needle,” Jonathan Lemire and Alexander Ward of Politico reported Monday night. "Biden is ordering his advisers to present a range of U.S. response options that would forcefully deter other attacks while also not further inflaming a smoldering region, according to two officials granted anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly about private deliberations."
"According to the report, "Among the options on the table for the Pentagon: striking Iranian personnel in Syria or Iraq or Iranian naval assets in the Persian Gulf, according to the officials. The Iranian government, for its part, has suggested that a strike on Iran itself would be a red line. The officials suggested that, once the president gave the go-ahead, the retaliation would likely begin in the next couple of days and come in waves against a range of targets."
And all of those IRGC commanders have already left Syria and gone into hiding leaving those bases. The Pentagon usually does not telegraph so much if it wants the element of surprise. https://t.co/mdrUPz8otp
— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) February 1, 2024
No comments:
Post a Comment