The United States government is hopeful that the military operation will be a multinational mission, but defence chiefs believe that the Bush administration is prepared to launch the attack on its own or with the assistance of Israel, if there is little international support. British military chiefs believe an attack would be limited to a series of air strikes against nuclear plants - a land assault is not being considered at the moment.

Great, is there a better way to F-up our future than a joint US-Israeli attack on Iran?

Then is this going to be the 'Western Front' in the battle-plan?  I think there's some talk of getting the Boy Scouts to take on the ground assault...

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/1310AP_Venezuela_Oil_Total.html

"Last week, Venezuela's oil minister, Rafael Ramirez, said of Exxon Mobil Corp. "we don't want them to be here" because the Irving, Texas-based company has resisted tax increases and contract changes that are part of a policy by President Hugo Chavez's government to re-nationalize the oil industry."


What other country in it's right mind would sign onto this stupidity.
Odograph,

Yes, an attack on Tel Aviv. That would be far worse.

I've got to admit, that is exactly the kind of false dichotomy our recent foreign policy is built upon.
And does an attack on Iran actually serve to DEcrease the chances that Israel is targeted?

It's not just the PLO that has 'Never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity'  The mutual paranoia in the region has done well for the arms dealers, and practically noone else.

It buys them 5-10 years.
Promises, promises.