How Effective Is Our Message To Iran If Even We Don't Get It

I noticed a difference of opinion on Contentions on what to make of this New York Times article:

U.S. Rejected Aid for Israeli Raid on Iranian Nuclear Site

President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran’s main nuclear complex and told the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage Iran’s suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American and foreign officials.

Gordon G. Chang's response in his post is:

By taking a military solution off the table, the Bush administration has placed great pressure on Obama’s diplomacy to succeed.

Eric Trager counters:

Rather, by denying Israel’s request for aid to attack Iran - and then leaking this information to the press - the Bush administration is signaling that Israel’s threat to use force against Iran is highly credible. The Bush administration is further signaling that only the United States - which Israel needs for acquiring bunker-busting bombs and permission to use Iraqi air space - can prevent Israel from acting on this threat.

Me? I have no idea what the message is.
But if there is supposed to be an implied threat that Israel is chomping at the bit to go after Iran, I just hope that Iran is hearing it--and that Israel is actually prepared to carry it through.

At the very least, the last 2 weeks should let Iran know that Israel is serious.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Iran.