Nice try.
Mossadegh was friendly, what happened to him and others like him?
Certain lobbies are very active in trying to convince the need for more wars for their own interests, NOT for the interests of America, these same certain lobbies are the reason for the financial mess that we are in.
p.s.
Read this new poll result (I wonder why?):
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091203/ap_on_re_us/us_american_isolation
Mossadegh was friendly, what happened to him and others like him?
Certain lobbies are very active in trying to convince the need for more wars for their own interests, NOT for the interests of America, these same certain lobbies are the reason for the financial mess that we are in.
p.s.
Read this new poll result (I wonder why?):
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091203/ap_on_re_us/us_american_isolation
پارانوید
من فکر نمی کنم که اگر امریکا بخواهد به ایران حمله کند گروگان گرفتن چند امریکایی باعث خواهد شد که حمله نکند
نقشه یک حمله نظامی باید حداقل چندین ماه اگر نگویم چند سال قبل از حمله طرح شود
به این اسانی نیست که شما فکر میکنید
اگر واقعا امریکا تصمیم گرفته به ایران حمله کند این چیزها جلوی او را نحواهد گرفت
ولی من شخصا فکر نمی کنم امریکا الان قادر به حمله گسترده علیه ایران باشد و اگر فرض کنیم که فقط با چند هواپیما و موشک ایران را بزند این نه تنها به نفع نیست امریکا بلکه به ضررش تمام خواد شد
من فکر نمی کنم که اگر امریکا بخواهد به ایران حمله کند گروگان گرفتن چند امریکایی باعث خواهد شد که حمله نکند
نقشه یک حمله نظامی باید حداقل چندین ماه اگر نگویم چند سال قبل از حمله طرح شود
به این اسانی نیست که شما فکر میکنید
اگر واقعا امریکا تصمیم گرفته به ایران حمله کند این چیزها جلوی او را نحواهد گرفت
ولی من شخصا فکر نمی کنم امریکا الان قادر به حمله گسترده علیه ایران باشد و اگر فرض کنیم که فقط با چند هواپیما و موشک ایران را بزند این نه تنها به نفع نیست امریکا بلکه به ضررش تمام خواد شد
Timssar, you are correct in that sense that Desert 1 resecue mission failed during Carter admin to release the hostages. But it is a double edge swort for Obama! He is damned to do it or damned if he don't. Either way the hostages can finish him off for the next election and the Republicans now are giving high fives to each others and probably have established back channels with the Iranian regime not to release the hostages a la October surprise! You never know. But the trump card is in the hand of the Iranian regime. As for attacking Iran just read the last speech of a 5 star general by the name of President Eisenhover. He said that 'beware of the arm industry which has become so giant nothing can stop it!' Now if you think that they won't do it we will see. But the committment is there to feed the arm industry in the US!
Yes the oil lobby was very influential to prevent other sources of energy to be developed on a major national level since the 1960's.
Which trump card over China? If US is hurt by certain deceiving internal forces, what kind of a trump card can be held in the long run?
United States is being weakened from INSIDE (I know, the long run does not exist in mass media's topics of importance, and nor should it be discussed. They only focus on and discuss the newly made bad guys and countries which should be attacked immediately, on a 24/7 basis).
Which trump card over China? If US is hurt by certain deceiving internal forces, what kind of a trump card can be held in the long run?
United States is being weakened from INSIDE (I know, the long run does not exist in mass media's topics of importance, and nor should it be discussed. They only focus on and discuss the newly made bad guys and countries which should be attacked immediately, on a 24/7 basis).
Timssar, if you read history, countries engage in war due to economical collapse. WWI, WWII all were due to collapse of economies. Here in the US the defense industry has plants in EVERY state of the union! Therefore it is pressure on the senator of the congressman to get reelected. Therefore they push for bills that reviltelise their state economies. Therefore due to the collapse of the economy in the US, it is important to bring down the 10% unemployement by creating jobs. SO far the defense industry is trying to do that if wars continue to expand in the middle east.
This is what I posted a while ago on the topic of Israel attacking Iran. It is relevant to what we discuss here.
---
If it was up to Israel to attack Iran, they would attack Iran, like yesterday. It is absolutely to their national interest to attack Iran. It does not matter much how successful the attack is in military terms, it will be a political success for Israel regardless. Attacking Iran would strengthen AN and hardliners and would cripple the dissent movement. In other words, an attack would further radicalize the government in Iran. What is a better outcome for Israel than a more radical and isolated Iran?
The point is that an attack is also in interest of the current government in Iran. It'll give them carte blanche in dealing with the increasingly more popular dissent voices inside the country. It gives them justification for full establishment of military rule. It will unite their base (and maybe some people who are not too happy with them) to rally behind the government and against foreign agression. And finally, it changes the topic of dicussion in the society. It is one of many times when interests of the governments in Tehran and Tel Aviv are fully aligned with each other.
Make no mistake though; the government in Iran wants war, but only a limited war. In other words, they want an illusion of war for domestic consumption. IRI has always been surprisingly pragmatist. They will not escalate a conflict to a full scale war. They will not retaliate harshly. Their rhetoric will be deafening if an attack happens but their actions won't be. They will not engage US directly. They will always make enough concessions at the last minute to survive.
The only thing that prevents Israel from attacking is international pressure, and particularly US pressure. But frankly, if Iran and Israel both want an attack to happen, it will be very difficult for the international community to prevent it. And this will only strengthen IRI.
---
As for you other part of the question, I think an attack by Israel will help Netanyahu's government internally. Any involvement from US will be disastrous internally for Obama's administration.
That said, I honestly don't think there is much the west can do to prevent an attack. As mentioned above, there won't be a war but most probably there will be attacks.
---
If it was up to Israel to attack Iran, they would attack Iran, like yesterday. It is absolutely to their national interest to attack Iran. It does not matter much how successful the attack is in military terms, it will be a political success for Israel regardless. Attacking Iran would strengthen AN and hardliners and would cripple the dissent movement. In other words, an attack would further radicalize the government in Iran. What is a better outcome for Israel than a more radical and isolated Iran?
The point is that an attack is also in interest of the current government in Iran. It'll give them carte blanche in dealing with the increasingly more popular dissent voices inside the country. It gives them justification for full establishment of military rule. It will unite their base (and maybe some people who are not too happy with them) to rally behind the government and against foreign agression. And finally, it changes the topic of dicussion in the society. It is one of many times when interests of the governments in Tehran and Tel Aviv are fully aligned with each other.
Make no mistake though; the government in Iran wants war, but only a limited war. In other words, they want an illusion of war for domestic consumption. IRI has always been surprisingly pragmatist. They will not escalate a conflict to a full scale war. They will not retaliate harshly. Their rhetoric will be deafening if an attack happens but their actions won't be. They will not engage US directly. They will always make enough concessions at the last minute to survive.
The only thing that prevents Israel from attacking is international pressure, and particularly US pressure. But frankly, if Iran and Israel both want an attack to happen, it will be very difficult for the international community to prevent it. And this will only strengthen IRI.
---
As for you other part of the question, I think an attack by Israel will help Netanyahu's government internally. Any involvement from US will be disastrous internally for Obama's administration.
That said, I honestly don't think there is much the west can do to prevent an attack. As mentioned above, there won't be a war but most probably there will be attacks.
Israel can not and will not attack Iran. Puttin put a stamp on it. The Israelis don't have the capbilities to reach Iran. They can't fly over Saudi, Iraq nor Turkey since the gov of these nations said that the airspace is off limit. That is why the US has to do it from the central Aisa bases and the Persian gulf. The US can finish the job very quickly. The price of oil will not go up for a long time since Other OPEC members will increase the production. It is just a matter of time. A weakened Iranian gov will allow the opressed people of Iran to rise and overthrow the gov. A coalition Gov will be the best Gov for the future of Iran. All political parties should participate for a democratic Iran. If it is happenning in Iraq why not in Iran...
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Bill Sardi[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Testimony before the US Congress is circulating on the internet. It pertains to a proposed oil pipeline through Central Asia that is applicable to the current war in Afghanistan. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]On February 12, 1998, John J. Maresca, vice president, international relations for UNOCAL oil company, testified before the US House of Representatives, Committee on International Relations. Maresca provided information to Congress on Central Asia oil and gas reserves and how they might shape US foreign policy. UNOCAL's problem? As Maresca said: "How to get the region's vast energy resources to the markets." The oil reserves are in areas north of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. Routes for a pipeline were proposed that would transport oil on a 42-inch pipe southward thru Afghanistan for 1040 miles to the Pakistan coast. Such a pipeline would cost about $2.5 billion and carry about 1 million barrels of oil per day. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maresca told Congress then that: "It's not going to be built until there is a single Afghan government. That's the simple answer." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Dana Rohrbacher, California congressman, then identified the Taliban as the ruling controllers among various factions in Afghanistan and characterized them as "opium producers." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Then Rohrbacher asked Maresca: "There is a Saudi terrorist who is infamous for financing terrorism around the world. Is he in the Taliban area or is he up there with the northern people?" [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maresca answered: "If it is the person I am thinking of, he is there in the Taliban area." This testimony obviously alluded to Osama bin Laden. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Then Rorhbacher asked: "... in the northern area as compared to the place where the Taliban are in control, would you say that one has a better human rights record toward women than the other?" [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maresca responded by saying: "With respect to women, yes. But I don't think either faction here has a very clean human rights record, to tell you the truth." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]So women's rights were introduced into Congressional testimony by Congressman Rohrbacher as the wedge for UNOCAL to build its pipeline through Afghanistan. Three years later CNN would be airing its acclaimed TV documentary "Under The Veil," which displayed the oppressive conditions that women endure in Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban (a propaganda film for the oil pipeline?). [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Rohrbacher then went on to say that a democratic election should take place in Afghanistan and "if the Taliban are not willing to make that kind of commitment, I would be very hesitant to move foreward on a $2.5 billion investment because without that commitment, I don't think there is going to be any tranquility in that land." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Beginning in 1998 UNOCAL was chastized, particularly by women's rights groups, for discussions with the Taliban, and headed in retreat as a worldwide effort mounted to come to the defense of the Afghani women. This forced UNOCAL to withdraw from its talks with the Taliban and dissolve its multinational partnership in that region. In 1999 Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections newsletter said: "UNOCAL company officials said late last year (1998) they were abandoning the project because of the need to cut costs in the Caspian region and because of the repeated failure of efforts to resolve the long civil conflict in Afghanistan." [Volume 4, issue #20 - Monday, November 22, 1999] [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Three days following the attack on the World Trade Centers in New York City, UNOCAL issued a statement reconfirming it had withdrawn from its project in Afghanistan, long before recent events. [www.unocal.com September 14, 2001 statement] [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]UNOCAL was not the only party positioning themselves to tap into oil and gas reserves in central Asia. UNOCAL was primary member of a multinational consortium called CentGas (Central Asia Gas) along with Delta Oil Company Limited (Saudi Arabia), the Government of Turkmenistan, Indonesia Petroleum, LTD. (INPEX) (Japan), ITOCHU Oil Exploration Co., Ltd. (Japan), Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co., Ltd. (Korea), the Crescent Group (Pakistan) and RAO Gazprom (Russia). [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Just because CentGas had dissolved does not mean that the involved parties have totally abandoned their interest in building an oil pipeline out of Central Asia. There is also talk of another pipeline thru Iran. India and Pakistan are bidding to be the pipeline terminal ocean port since they would obtain hundreds of millions of dollars in fees. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]So, in 1998 Osama bin Laden was identified as the villain behind the Taliban, Afghanistani women the victims of an oppressive Taliban regime, and the stage was set for a future stabilization effort (i.e. a war). Was all this a cover story for a future oil pipeline? [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In November 2000, Bruce Hoffman, director of the Rand Institute office in Washington DC, indicated that the next US President would have to face up to the growing threat is Islamic terrorism. Hoffman: "The next administration must turn its immediate attention to knitting together the full range of US counterterrorist capabilities into a cohesive plan." [Los Angeles Times, November 12, 2000] [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]All that was needed was a triggering event.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]On February 12, 1998, John J. Maresca, vice president, international relations for UNOCAL oil company, testified before the US House of Representatives, Committee on International Relations. Maresca provided information to Congress on Central Asia oil and gas reserves and how they might shape US foreign policy. UNOCAL's problem? As Maresca said: "How to get the region's vast energy resources to the markets." The oil reserves are in areas north of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. Routes for a pipeline were proposed that would transport oil on a 42-inch pipe southward thru Afghanistan for 1040 miles to the Pakistan coast. Such a pipeline would cost about $2.5 billion and carry about 1 million barrels of oil per day. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maresca told Congress then that: "It's not going to be built until there is a single Afghan government. That's the simple answer." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Dana Rohrbacher, California congressman, then identified the Taliban as the ruling controllers among various factions in Afghanistan and characterized them as "opium producers." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Then Rohrbacher asked Maresca: "There is a Saudi terrorist who is infamous for financing terrorism around the world. Is he in the Taliban area or is he up there with the northern people?" [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maresca answered: "If it is the person I am thinking of, he is there in the Taliban area." This testimony obviously alluded to Osama bin Laden. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Then Rorhbacher asked: "... in the northern area as compared to the place where the Taliban are in control, would you say that one has a better human rights record toward women than the other?" [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Maresca responded by saying: "With respect to women, yes. But I don't think either faction here has a very clean human rights record, to tell you the truth." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]So women's rights were introduced into Congressional testimony by Congressman Rohrbacher as the wedge for UNOCAL to build its pipeline through Afghanistan. Three years later CNN would be airing its acclaimed TV documentary "Under The Veil," which displayed the oppressive conditions that women endure in Afghanistan under the rule of the Taliban (a propaganda film for the oil pipeline?). [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Rohrbacher then went on to say that a democratic election should take place in Afghanistan and "if the Taliban are not willing to make that kind of commitment, I would be very hesitant to move foreward on a $2.5 billion investment because without that commitment, I don't think there is going to be any tranquility in that land." [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Beginning in 1998 UNOCAL was chastized, particularly by women's rights groups, for discussions with the Taliban, and headed in retreat as a worldwide effort mounted to come to the defense of the Afghani women. This forced UNOCAL to withdraw from its talks with the Taliban and dissolve its multinational partnership in that region. In 1999 Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections newsletter said: "UNOCAL company officials said late last year (1998) they were abandoning the project because of the need to cut costs in the Caspian region and because of the repeated failure of efforts to resolve the long civil conflict in Afghanistan." [Volume 4, issue #20 - Monday, November 22, 1999] [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Three days following the attack on the World Trade Centers in New York City, UNOCAL issued a statement reconfirming it had withdrawn from its project in Afghanistan, long before recent events. [www.unocal.com September 14, 2001 statement] [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]UNOCAL was not the only party positioning themselves to tap into oil and gas reserves in central Asia. UNOCAL was primary member of a multinational consortium called CentGas (Central Asia Gas) along with Delta Oil Company Limited (Saudi Arabia), the Government of Turkmenistan, Indonesia Petroleum, LTD. (INPEX) (Japan), ITOCHU Oil Exploration Co., Ltd. (Japan), Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co., Ltd. (Korea), the Crescent Group (Pakistan) and RAO Gazprom (Russia). [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Just because CentGas had dissolved does not mean that the involved parties have totally abandoned their interest in building an oil pipeline out of Central Asia. There is also talk of another pipeline thru Iran. India and Pakistan are bidding to be the pipeline terminal ocean port since they would obtain hundreds of millions of dollars in fees. [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]So, in 1998 Osama bin Laden was identified as the villain behind the Taliban, Afghanistani women the victims of an oppressive Taliban regime, and the stage was set for a future stabilization effort (i.e. a war). Was all this a cover story for a future oil pipeline? [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In November 2000, Bruce Hoffman, director of the Rand Institute office in Washington DC, indicated that the next US President would have to face up to the growing threat is Islamic terrorism. Hoffman: "The next administration must turn its immediate attention to knitting together the full range of US counterterrorist capabilities into a cohesive plan." [Los Angeles Times, November 12, 2000] [/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]All that was needed was a triggering event.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]October 15, 2001[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Bill Sardi [send him mail] is a [/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]health journalist at www.askbillsardi.com.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Copyright © 2001 by the Bill Sardi Word of Knowledge Agency, San Dimas, California.[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Copyright © 2001 by the Bill Sardi Word of Knowledge Agency, San Dimas, California.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Back to LewRockwell.com Home Page[/FONT]
An attack on Iran may hurt the Islamic Repulic, but it will hurt Iran as whole a lot more. Every possibility I have studied so far suggests that an attack on Iran will have to include destruction of a very large part of Iran's infrastructure; from roads and bridges to power/water/etc ... I am not willing to get rid of even IRI at that cost.
Not sure how you arrived at that Amir jaan. Would you care to elaborate what the benefit would be in destroying infrastrucre such as roada, bridges and water (damns, or purification plants, I assume)? You mentioned studying possibilities. Are you referring to expert analysis or past cases which may be similar?
So they imply, very softly that
They drop flowers in war, it’s for the good of those who are attacked and their country ruined and run over by others, it’s about love! Collateral damage, is a lie!
On those who start wars
“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” - Hermann Goering
“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” “It is not only the living who are killed in war.” – Isaac Azimov
“War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace.” – Thomas Mann
“Give me the money that has been spent in war and I will clothe every man, woman, and child in an attire of which kings and queens will be proud. I will build a schoolhouse in every valley over the whole earth. I will crown every hillside with a place of worship consecrated to peace.” -Charles Sumner
“A great war leaves the country with three armies - an army of cripples, an army of mourners, and an army of thieves.” - German Proverb
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.” - Eisenhower
“Nations have recently been led to borrow billions for war; no nation has ever borrowed largely for education. Probably, no nation is rich enough to pay for both war and civilization. We must make our choice; we cannot have both.” -Abraham Flexner
“Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” - Ernest Hemingway
“In war, truth is the first casualty.” - Aeschylus
“We kill because we are afraid of our own shadow, afraid that if we used a little common sense we'd have to admit that our glorious principles were wrong.” - Henry Miller
“War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus.” - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
“War is a catalog of blunders.” – Winston Churchill
“Don't talk to me about atrocities in war; all war is an atrocity” – Kitchener
“There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” – Howard Zinn
“I find war detestable but those who praise it without participating in it even more so” – Romain Rolland
“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?” - Gandhi
“The world is full enough of hurts and mischance without wars to multiply them.” – Tolkien
They drop flowers in war, it’s for the good of those who are attacked and their country ruined and run over by others, it’s about love! Collateral damage, is a lie!
On those who start wars
“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” - Hermann Goering
“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” “It is not only the living who are killed in war.” – Isaac Azimov
“War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace.” – Thomas Mann
“Give me the money that has been spent in war and I will clothe every man, woman, and child in an attire of which kings and queens will be proud. I will build a schoolhouse in every valley over the whole earth. I will crown every hillside with a place of worship consecrated to peace.” -Charles Sumner
“A great war leaves the country with three armies - an army of cripples, an army of mourners, and an army of thieves.” - German Proverb
“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.” - Eisenhower
“Nations have recently been led to borrow billions for war; no nation has ever borrowed largely for education. Probably, no nation is rich enough to pay for both war and civilization. We must make our choice; we cannot have both.” -Abraham Flexner
“Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime.” - Ernest Hemingway
“In war, truth is the first casualty.” - Aeschylus
“We kill because we are afraid of our own shadow, afraid that if we used a little common sense we'd have to admit that our glorious principles were wrong.” - Henry Miller
“War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus.” - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
“War is a catalog of blunders.” – Winston Churchill
“Don't talk to me about atrocities in war; all war is an atrocity” – Kitchener
“There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” – Howard Zinn
“I find war detestable but those who praise it without participating in it even more so” – Romain Rolland
“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty and democracy?” - Gandhi
“The world is full enough of hurts and mischance without wars to multiply them.” – Tolkien
This article has some nice analysis. If you don't want to read the whole thing skip to the last few paragraphs:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KK25Ak01.html
I generally agree with them. I think that the US will wait until January, and then tell the Europeans, Russia, and China that if they don't cooperate with them in sanctions that the US will start air strikes. I think the Europeans will come around quickly but Russia and China would make sure that they get some more concessions, and especially with regards to China that its oil imports aren't decreased as a result of this. Saudis and kuwait would gladly make up for Iran's oil exports, at higher prices as well.
I also think that if the United Nations decides to sanction Iran, even though this wouldn't stop Iran from its nuclear program or other actions, it would really hurt the economy. The Rial would probably go from the present level of 10,000 to a dollar to 25,000 or 30,000 by the end of 2010. Prices of goods would also incredibly increase and inflation could go above 50%.
I think Obama doesn't want to get involved in a military conflict with Iran but at the same time doesn't want to be seen as being weak.
At the end of the day, Iran would end up like pre-apartheid South Africa in the late 1980s where it was isolated from the rest of the world, the regime fully in control, and yet with internal problems growing.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KK25Ak01.html
I generally agree with them. I think that the US will wait until January, and then tell the Europeans, Russia, and China that if they don't cooperate with them in sanctions that the US will start air strikes. I think the Europeans will come around quickly but Russia and China would make sure that they get some more concessions, and especially with regards to China that its oil imports aren't decreased as a result of this. Saudis and kuwait would gladly make up for Iran's oil exports, at higher prices as well.
I also think that if the United Nations decides to sanction Iran, even though this wouldn't stop Iran from its nuclear program or other actions, it would really hurt the economy. The Rial would probably go from the present level of 10,000 to a dollar to 25,000 or 30,000 by the end of 2010. Prices of goods would also incredibly increase and inflation could go above 50%.
I think Obama doesn't want to get involved in a military conflict with Iran but at the same time doesn't want to be seen as being weak.
At the end of the day, Iran would end up like pre-apartheid South Africa in the late 1980s where it was isolated from the rest of the world, the regime fully in control, and yet with internal problems growing.
IR is hoping for a soft war. It allows them to crack down heavily on the opposition. Why would you announce your intention to build 10 nuclear sites .... not 1, not 2 but 10? It's like a slap in the face of your enemy in an "iranian style"...or another words, telling the muslim people of the world (zadim to dahaneh doshman). If they truly want to build 10, they go and build 10. They are doing everything they can to create tension with the west just to give them that one opportunity to massacre thousands of opposition members. A desperate regime will resort to desperate measures. They understand what the consequences will be if they lose power in Iran.
A soft war will keep them in power for 10 more years and it will also allow them to pull out of the nuclear proliferation treaty and become like Israel or India.
ofcourse, the west may have different plans.
A soft war will keep them in power for 10 more years and it will also allow them to pull out of the nuclear proliferation treaty and become like Israel or India.
ofcourse, the west may have different plans.
As you can tell I'm against excuses for more wars or tensions leading to bogus wars which at the end, people will suffer.
“Statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.” – Mark twain
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.” - Adolph Hitler
“Political language. . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable.” - George Orwell
“Wars are not paid for in wartime, the bill comes later.” - Benjamin Franklin
(so far, over $900 billion dollars)
“I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind.” - Thomas Jefferson
“O peace! how many wars were waged in thy name.” - Alexander Pope
“Statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.” – Mark twain
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.” - Adolph Hitler
“Political language. . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable.” - George Orwell
“Wars are not paid for in wartime, the bill comes later.” - Benjamin Franklin
(so far, over $900 billion dollars)
“I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind.” - Thomas Jefferson
“O peace! how many wars were waged in thy name.” - Alexander Pope