Iran's letter to President Bush wasn't a warning; it's a bluff.
And this is not a game of tiddly winks. I gave examples such as 9/11/01, the USS Cole bombing, the Khobar Towers attack, Somalia Blackhawk Down, Beirut barracks bombings, African embassy bombings, et al to hit home the key point that the **real** attacks aren't preluded by warnings.
Nor was the attack on Spain's trains (or on London's 7/7 subways).
No warnings. No warning on any of the above.
Iran's letter to President Bush re-used an ancient Jihad threat in order to give credibility to a modern bluff. Without that thin veneer, it would be obvious to all invovled that Iran was bluffing. And for those paying attention, it still is obvious.
Pause
Here is what is going on: Iran is playing the insane rodeo clown. If you are familiar with cowboy rodeos, the rodeo clowns distract the bull away from the downed bull-rider.
Well, that's what Iran is doing.
Iran is distracting the U.S. military focus away from their downed rider: Hezbollah.
The government of Beirut has precious little control over Southern Lebanon right now, but had even less control when Syrian troops occupied that country. This is where Hezbollah operates.
But Hezbollah's safe haven was blown by a botched German prisoner exchange with a known PFLP terrorist for a German national held hostage in Iraq. Once the exchange was completed, the PFLP terrorist was seen fleeing to Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon...cementing the suspicions in the Coalition that Hezbollah was directing a large part of the insurgency inside Iraq.
Moreover, Hezbollah's protection has vanished. Faced with an ultimatum from President Bush, Syria's Assad withdrew his army from Lebanon. Thus, in two brief actions, Hezbollah was exposed as well as made vulnerable...military action from Israel, the Christian Beirut government, or from the U.S. (or a combination) against Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon no longer faced a wider war with Syria.
Hezbollah is on its own.
Now, you have to remember that Hezbollah is an Iranian umbrella group. Iran provides Hezbollah's funds, some training, and most of their weapons. In return, Hezbollah does Iran's bidding against the U.S. and Israel.
But with Hezbollah now exposed as a major player in the Iraq insurgency, and further made vulnerable by the withdrawal of Syria from Lebanon, Iran is facing losing one of its most powerful proxies...a loss that it can ill-afford as it has few friends in the region (Iranians are Persian, a race that has a traditional, pre-Islamic animosity toward Arabs).
And Iran has very few ways to project very little power. Defending Hezbollah physically inside Lebanon itself against an Israeli or U.S. attack would expose Iran to a crushing defeat both there as well as inside Iran itself due to simple military over-stretch.
So Iran is doing something desperate; they are "threatening" nuclear war against Israel and the U.S...two nuclear powers each capable of individually ending all life inside Iran itself.
Their theory is that the U.S. can't possibly (due to domestic and internation political considerations) wage a new war against Lebanon while Iraq is "in chaos" as Iran threatens nuclear war.
So by playing this bluff, Ahmadinejad believes that he can protect Hezbollah from being smashed by the U.S. military in Southern Lebanon.
And so far, he's right (though I'd place emphasis upon "so far").
Pause
But, it plays into Iran's gameplan to claim that radical jihadists "always warn their victims to convert before they attack."
They don't. They didn't warn before 9/11/2001, nor before the USS Cole bombing, nor before the Khobar Towers bombings, etc.
In short, making the sorts of claims that a few uninformed posters are making on this thread AIDS THE ENEMY.
Don't do that.