Charles Hugh Smith over at Of Two Minds takes up a theme we've discussed here before - that the situation in Iraq is (and has been for nearly a year) ripe for a deal between Iran and the U.S. that stabilizes the region into acceptable spheres of influence.
History is chockful of secret diplomacy which is later revealed to have played a decisive roles at key turning points. Sometimes secret deals are made, other times opportunities/openings are squandered. Either can mark a "tipping point" into conflict or cooperation.
The main point is that the public and media have literally no clue that critical negotiations or correspondence is passing between supposed enemies/neutral parties. In recent history, a prime example might be Nixon's visit to China and the secret meetings which led to diplomatic relations. The media had no clue that such negotiations were in progress...
...There are two compelling pieces of evidence which suggest the U.S. negotiated a deal with Iran in May, 2007. The first is a chart of coalition combat deaths in Iraq [note, follow link for chart], which show a steady increase up to May 2007 as horrifically effective armor-piercing roadside bombs were deployed by insurgents.
Second, the U.S. made it clear that such advanced weaponry was coming from Iran...
Much as I despise the Mullahs, a deal is the only real option for the best interests of the U.S., in my opinion. The blowback and unintended consequences of attacking Iran are just too great. If we see an announcement in the coming months about Iran suspending enrichment activities or agreeing to significant restrictions under IAEA supervision, then we can feel even more confident that a deal a major proportions has been struck.
Note the kind of analysis done by Mr. Smith and compare it to the "analysis" relayed via Forbes which we discussed in Iran War Porn.