- US officials point their finger at elite Iranian military forces for sabotaging attacks on oil tankers near the Persian Gulf.
- A week after the announcement of the Iranian "preparations for a possible attack" on US troops in the region, the United States punished most of the State Department personnel from neighboring Iraq
- and Iranian officials insist that nobody wants a war, and President Trump denies plans to direct 120,000 servicemen to the region.
- US military denied the assessment of the senior British commander that "there was no increased threat from the Iranian forces in Iraq and Syria.
US officials said they believed that Iranian naval divers had been attacked byduring the weekend, and they tell CBS News senior national correspondent for the security of David Martin, there are still no signs of Iran's refusal to allegedly plan to attack Americans in the region.
On Wednesday, the State Department ordered all non-emergency personnel and their families to leave the Iraqi people in the southern border of Iran, which the Iranian government supports various militia groups that fought against American troops
"US citizens in Iraq are exposed to greater risk of violence and kidnapping. Numerous terrorist and rebel groups are active in Iraq and regularly attack the Iraqi security forces and civilians. Anti-American sectarian militias can also threaten American citizens and western companies throughout Iraq, "said the State Department in its advisory department.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo resumed warning of a government administration on Tuesday that the US will react to Iran if it attacks an American interest in the Middle East, but he denied blame for sabotaging tankers in Tehran Officials believe that Iran was involved in the attacks on the Gulf oil tankers
He said that there was nothing "specific about the relationship" between Tehran and the attacks of tankers, adding: "I think that in the coming hours and days we will
At a rally on Tuesday in President Tramp emphasized that it was becoming one of the hallmarks of his rigid foreign policy, saying to his supporters that his administration "has brought dangerous regimes to justice, denying them the income from oil. to finance its corruption, oppression and terror ".
But, as Martin says, while the United States put a hand on the Iranian economy, the country remains dangerous.
Officials in the United States told Martin that a probable Islamic Revolutionary Guard Iran is responsible for Sunday attacks that blew openings in buildings of Saudi and Norwegian tankers that were laid near the Emirati port of Fujairah, not far from the Persian Gulf. Attached explosives to the courts of the courts, but the defense official told CBS News that further investigation was needed.
Trump sent troops to Iran? Meanwhile, Trump rejected the New York Times report, which said the administration was planning to send 120,000 US troops to the region to confront Iran. The United States has already sent a shock group of aircraft carriers and four B-52 bombers to the Persian Gulf.
The resignation of President Trump in the Times report came with a caveat: "Will I do this? Absolutely," he said, leaving the White House on Tuesday. "We did not plan it … and if we did, we would send more troops to that."
On the Capitol Hill, Virginia, Democratic Senator Tim Cain exploded the president's thought.
That would be unconstitutional. There is no way that this president will put us in a war with Iran, "said Kine.
Iran exacerbates nuclear threat
Iran sharply denies involvement in oil tanker attacks and accuses President Trump of" a very dangerous game at risk of devastating war. "
But on Wednesday, the Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said:" There will be no war. They also know this, we never start the war and never started the war, it is a confrontation of the will and more strong will.
He excludes any negotiations with the current US administration
But while he diminished the possibility of a conflict with the United States, Ayatollah also rejected the threat that Iran could take – within a few months – it will almost certainly lead to a significant American response.
Iran declared a week ago in response to President Trump, a US-led nuclear deal agreed in 2015 with world powers, to partly abandon the terms of the deal.
The Iranian regime has stated that other parties to the agreement
can not determine a way to circumvent new US sanctions to continue doing business with Tehran for 60 years.
Iran is allowed, under the terms of a nuclear deal, to enrich uranium to a concentration of just under 4% – the level at which it can be used for medical and scientific research.
The regime said that if agreements with Europe, Russia and China were not reached, in order to keep the deal from 2015, it would restore uranium enrichment to 20%. – which country officials said they could do it within four days. This indicator is significant, since as soon as uranium is cleared to 20%, it is much easier to enrich it to 90% needed for armament.
On Wednesday, ayatollah said: "Achieving 20% enrichment is the hardest part. It was the first hint of the Iranian regime that it could try to obtain the highly enriched uranium needed for an atomic bomb, although Iranian officials have always denied any interest in obtaining such
Both the United States and Israel made it clear that they would not allow the Islamic Republic to obtain the possibility of using nuclear weapons
US and allies on the same page?
There are signs of frustration by the European allies over the decision of the Trump administration not to And if it is a pledge for a nuclear deal, but also to exert new pressure on the Iranian regime, the US military officers said a little more than a week ago because they discovered "a series of preparations for a possible attack" on US troops at sea and on the ground in the Middle East East
The United States has about 5000 troops still in Iraq on the Iranian border, and despite the fact that the State Department's decision on Wednesday that non-emergency personnel leave the country, did not specifically mention the threat from Iran, this was a consequence. Iraq told CBS News on Wednesday that Pompeo ordered the removal of non-emergency US personnel from the country, because "these threats are serious"
However, on Tuesday, the British deputy commander of a joint US-led military operation in Iraq has challenged a statement about an increased threat to Allied troops in the region.
"There was no increased threat from the Iranian forces in Iraq and Syria," said Major General Christopher Gic at a video briefing from Baghdad to the Pentagon, "The Guardian says." Of course, we are aware of this presence. they are together with a whole host of others, because this is the environment we are in. We are watching Shiite militia groups, the level of threat seems to grow, then we will lift our measures to protect our forces "
But the central command of the US military, which carries out overseeing the transaction, inherent in the permit (OIR) in Iraq and in all other US operations in the region directly denied the statement to Guic later Tuesday.
"The latest comments by the deputy commander of the OIC contradict the identified threats that can be obtained from the intelligence agencies of the United States and allies regarding the Iranian forces in the region" , – said the captain of the Central Command spokesman, Bill Urban, in a statement.
The German troops, meanwhile, announced the cessation of their training operations in Iraq on Wednesday, but said that he had no information about the increased German threat troops in a country from Iran.
D Representative of the Defense Ministry, Jens Flosdorff, stressed the increased regional tension when he confirmed that the military forces of Germany temporarily suspend the training of the Iraqi forces, "focusing on our partner countries", but adding that "there are no specific warnings about attacks on German targets "