Conservatives are using a U.N. report released today to instigate a confrontation with Iran. Drudge headlines “Iran Nuke showdown.” AEI writes, “Now is the time to ratchet up the pressure.” In a speech at the University of Nebraska, Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) tamped down on such rhetoric, arguing the way forward must involve diplomatic engagement. The first step, he argued, is to make clear we do not see “regime change in Iran”:

The United States must be resolute and clear-headed in our dealings with Iran…just as the Administration has been in the latest round of the Six Party Talks regarding North Korea’s nuclear weapons. The agreement that Assistant Secretary of State Chris Hill reached on February 13 with his colleagues from China, North Korea, South Korea, Japan and Russia reflects the power of adept diplomacy, supported through regional coordination, strengthened by financial pressure, and our military presence in South Korea, Japan and across the Asia-Pacific region.

The United States must employ similar, wise statecraft to redirect deepening Middle East tensions toward a higher ground of resolution. We must be clear that the United States does not seek regime change in Iran. We must be clear that our objections are to the actions of the Iranian government…not the Iranian people.

In the last month, the Bush administration has deployed an additional carrier group to Iran, stormed Iranian government offices in Iraq, and accused the “highest levels” of the Iranian government of funneling weapons into Iraq. Today, Hagel warned that “careless rhetoric” and “flawed intelligence” risk triggering a military confrontation with Iran:

The United States needs to weigh very carefully its actions regarding Iran. In a hazy, hair-triggered environment, careless rhetoric and military movements that one side may believe are required to demonstrate resolve and strength…can be misinterpreted as preparations for military options. The risk of inadvertent conflict because of miscalculation is great.

The United States must be cautious and wise not to follow the same destructive path on Iran as we did on Iraq. We blundered into Iraq because of flawed intelligence, flawed assumptions, flawed judgments, and questionable intentions.

Read the full speech here.

Last night on CBS, chief Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer was sharply critical of the Bush administration’s attempt to spin Britain’s Iraq drawdown as a sign that conditions are improving.

“If that’s the claim, it’s going to be a very hard sell to a country and a public that has already turned against this war,” Schieffer said. In fact, the UK’s decision to redeploy troops is “going to make the president even more isolated,” he said, adding, “Whether you’re for the war or against the war, Katie, what this underlines tonight is that the coalition that the president put together to fight this war is now coming apart.”

Drawing parallels to the Vietnam era, Schieffer said Tony Blair’s decision reminded him of “when things were going badly, and the crusty old senator from Vermont, George Aiken, said there’s only one way out here, that’s to declare victory and just leave. That’s what we’re seeing.”

Watch it:

Transcript: Read more

Yesterday, Vice President Cheney attacked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) for supporting Iraq redeployment:

CHENEY: I think, in fact, if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we’ll do is validate the al Qaeda strategy. … I think that’s exactly the wrong course to go on. I think that’s the course of action that Speaker Pelosi and Jack Murtha support. I think it would be a huge mistake for the country.

Q Is that policy that we hear from the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi — from other Democrats, is that a policy of defeat?

CHENEY: Yes.

Today, a reporter asked White House Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino about Cheney’s comments. She refused to disavow them:

QUESTION: Was he at all out of line in making those comments?

PERINO: The Vice President out of line? Absolutely not. He was questioning the merits of the — of their proposal.

It’s no surprise that President Bush supports Cheney’s attacks. In the lead-up to the 2006 elections, Bush’s message was that his opponents want “America to lose and the terrorists to win.” Watch it:

Digg It!

Transcript: Read more