Still going on in the background...

There seems to be a lot of background chatter about a possible impending attack by Israel on Iran's nuclear facilities.

Reuters reported yesterday that an Israeli television report quoted unnamed diplomatic sources as saying the U.S. won't permit Israel to attack Iran's nuclear program as long as U.S. troops are stationed in Iraq.

"The report on Channel 10 said any strike against Iran would leave U.S. forces based in Iraq vulnerable to retaliation. Depending on who becomes the next U.S. president, troops could remain in Iraq from under two years to indefinitely," Reuters said.

And there's this report in fractured English from the Press Trust of India, also yesterday:

New York, Oct 6 (PTI) Symbolising Israel as a signature mark of the United States in the middle east, Iran's foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki has said that any offensive action by Tel Aviv would be seen as an attack by Washington.
Iran does not believe that Israelis or Americans will attack its nuclear facilities but any attack by Tel Aviv would be considered an attack by Washington, Mottaki said.

"In the Middle East, (no one) makes a distinction between the US and Israel," the minister told Newsweek in an interview.

Asked why his country is calling for wiping out Israel from the map of the earth, Mottaki said Tehran does not recognise Israel.

Reiterating to continue its uranium enrichment programme, he said "What we are doing is completely legal," emphasising that negotiations are the only way to arrive at mutually acceptable solution to the issue.

Mottaki, however, welcomed the Bush administration's decision to send its Under Secretary William Burns to attend recent talks between Tehran and European Union on nuclear issue saying as "the first realistic step" by Washington.

"We welcomed the participation by Mr Burns in the Geneva talks. We feel that if this is the realistic approach taken by the US right now vis--vis the nuclear issue, they must continue with such efforts," he added.

Previously, Mottaki said the US administration attached certain provisos to their presence in the talks.

Burns' "presence in Geneva meant that those were no longer in play. An effort has started and if it is to succeed in resolving the nuclear issue, we have to take it to the next step," he added.

Reuters also moved a story about French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner urging Israel not to launch a military strike against Iran's nuclear program:

Kouchner, in the region for talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders, urged the Jewish state to continue to support Western-backed sanctions and dialogue to press Iran to halt its atomic project, the Haaretz daily said.

"I know that in Israel, and the Israeli army, there are those who are preparing for a military solution or an attack" aimed at halting the Iranian program, Kouchner told the paper in an interview.

"In my opinion that's not the solution," he said, adding that the possibility of Iran achieving a nuclear weapon was also "absolutely unacceptable."

Kouchner called the risk of an Israeli strike on Iran a "danger." He said Tehran was aware Israel had said it would not wait until Iran could produce a nuclear bomb.

He said the West should pursue "talk, talk and more talk," including further sanctions to persuade Iran to stop its nuclear program. Tehran denies seeking to build an atomic bomb, saying it only wants to generate electricity.

"I don't think the alternative is to bomb first," Kouchner said.

Kouchner said France believed Iran may be able to produce one atomic weapon within two to four years.

Tehran last month rejected a United Nations Security Council resolution demanding it halt its nuclear enrichment work.

Israel, widely believed to be the Middle East's only nuclear power, sees Iran's nuclear program as a security threat, citing remarks by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calling for the Jewish state's demise.