Listening to the almost daily news coming from the Pentagon and the White House over Iran's supposed help to Iraqi insurgents and sectarian militias has a familiar ring to it. One piece of "evidence" after another seems to come to light every few days that is more damning.
Beneath these high profile reports of Iranian advisors, Iranian munitions and arms, Iranian interference, and even some hints of Iranian-led attacks on our soldiers is a feeling a deja vue. While there are quite a few small reports saying that there is truly no real evidence for most of these reports, these seem to slide quietly beneath the waves of the press coverage and disappear.
Does anyone else but me have a been-there, done-that feeling about all of this? Isn't it the slightest bit familiar to you? I see only two possible explanations for this. The first is my cynicsm talking. It says that the Bush administration is manufacturing these reports as an excuse to invade Iran exactly as they did running up to the invasion of Iraq. The more rational side of me says that they cannot actually expect to pull the same sad sorry stunt twice in a row, but the other side argues back that if you look at the course of the Iraqi war a decent argument can be made for the claim that Mr. Bush doesn't learn from his mistakes.
The other possible explanation is that it's all true. If that's the case, then Mr. Bush may be in deep doo doo at this point since most people are not going to believe his cries of "wolf" a second time, particularly those in congress who will be facing reelection in a bit under two years. The cynic in me (yeah she's always there) says that perhaps all of this stuff is being manufactured in Iran trying to get Mr. Bush to attempt an invasion. Nothing pulls a country together more than a common enemy. The Iranian government is on shaky ground in a lot of ways because religious leaders in general make extremely poor rulers when it comes to matters of economy, infrastructure, and other such things, and whether Mr. Bush accepts it or not the Mullah's run the country, not their nutcake President.
So I sit here with the drums of war echoing once again inside my head and I sincerely wonder what Mr. Bush is up to this time, and whether he would indeed be so incredibly stupid as to think he could invade Iran without the rest of the region going up in flames.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 31
1) It has, or is attempting to obtain weapons of mass destruction
2) It is directly or indirectly aiding terrorists
3) These terrorists are threatening US interests, not least killing US nationals
4) It is directly threat to it's neighbours
5) It is governed by an oppresive regime which is denying it's people freedom and democracy
Oh sorry those are the reasons for invading Iraq!!! Silly me!!
1) Nothing to prove that the Iranian's are developing nuclear capability and even if it was, why shouln't it. It is now pretty obvious that the Bush has his sights on Iran, and that the Iranians now have EVERY reason to develop the ultimate deterrent. Bush is GOADING the Iranians into developing nuclear weapons.
2) Nothing proven
Even if the Iranian government was supplying Shia insurgents then it really has nothing to do with the US. If the US military was not in Iraq in the first place, would the Iranians be attacking US nationals at all? In a normal situation, the Iraqis would have to deal with the Iranians supplying "terrorists" with weaponry, NOT the international community, specifically the US and Britain.
3) Refer to point 2
4) The old chestnut about Iran's alleged intentions to Israel. Nothing proven besides rhetoric by Iranian ministers, playing to their target audience in an attempt to promote themselves as leaders of the Islamic world. If Iran does actually threaten Israel deal with it then, not before.
5) It is a government elected by the people. There are worse regimes in the world, and worse have been allowed to exist. Looking back at Saddam's reign, the one thing you can say about him is he kept the lid on an inferno.
The propaganda machine is in full swing, and George has just under two years to lead us into armageddon. An exaggeration maybe, but who knows what further hell he has the potential to unleash. You can be sure that if Iran IS attacked, "we ain't seen nothin' yet!" .
God help us all if that happens.
The most we could do at this point is to do a quick strike (dumb), which I'm sure they have planned for in many ways, including a huge rallying cry to fellow Muslims to kill Satan. They would love nothing better than that I'm sure and continue to taunt us and Europe to do it over nukes etc. Iran is a huge threat to stability in the region, which would ripple through the world, whether we were in Iraq or not; but our current situation makes it that much harder to counter.
I wish we could get lucky and have them have another overnight revolution to calm things down with them anyway........
Thanks.
Don't be silly. The possibility of conflict with Iran should be unthinkable. '
Joe there was also no reason to go into Iraq.
This president does stupid things just to raise his approval rating. I wouldn't count this out if Bush thinks that going into Iran will improve his ratings he will he will do that, with manufactured truth based upon incomplete truths or even lies, just as he has done in the past.
You people are blind.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6353489.stm
While any sane person might say we cannot go into Iran because we haven't the troops, the equipment, or the logistical support to do so, you have to remember who The Decider really is these days.
Even if we do prove the weapons were provided with the consent of those in high positions, what can we do? It seems the majority of the people in Iran are not exactly fond of their outdated government, so attacking the state of Iran on any level would only hurt our cause.
With that said, the US won't attack, but I think we can make a greater case to other nations to put sanctions on Iran. Also, I think we should watch the borders more closely.
If the US army was not in Iraq in the first place, which they shouldn't be, would any of the US military have been killed by these alleged Iranian weapons?
Iraqi insurgents. That's according to the
Iraq Study Group. So why aren't we sending
carriers to Saudi Arabia?
* We have a military presence already in Iraq.
* Iran's president has made comments in the world media that no
responsible ruler would ever make.
* The world does not want nuclear weapons in the hands of
irresponsible rulers, even if those rulers say they are worried
a US attack.
* It may be true that the popularity of Iran's president may be
faltering and there is a waiting game going on.
* Israel takes the hatred from Iran and the broader Middle
East very seriously and there is no doubt will be forced to
take action at some point of nuclear weapons look like they
are being developled.
* The Middle East provides a substantial amoung of energy
to the world, and a botched war attempt could plunge the
area into chaos.
* If there was chaos and war it would be to everyone's
interest to make damn well sure that it did not get protracted
like Iraq.
* Americas military is best utilized in an all out war, so there
may be a big incentive to avoid repeating Iraq's mistake and
try to goad Iran into stepping up hostilities or to intimidate
Iran into backing down - two modes that would be beneficial
to the West in a confrontation.
My guess, and it is only a guess is that we did not invest all
the time, effort, money and lives in Iraq to just solve the problem
of Iraq. Anyone who has followed the news knows that the
post-WWII history has revolved around oil from the Middle
East and anti-semitism, and anti-Western terrorism from that
area culminating in 911 and on an escalating trajectory.
Coupled with the fact that waiting just makes things look
better from the Iranian side, the time is optimal before the
next election to finish the job or reshaping the Middle East.
The face that trying to use peaceful means has not been such
a great success is going to be a big motivator to resort by
necessity to giving Iran a huge black eye ... and coming down
heavily on any manifestation anywhere of Islamic militancy in
order to incent these societies to sue for peace on terms that
will include having their schools and medias monitored for
anti-West propaganda and any hint of Islamic militancy. This
worked in Japan and Germany post-WWII and is out best hope,
and the best hope of the Middle East as well.
It also didn't help a whole lot that the guy in charge over there has stated that there is little or no evidence that the Iranian government is involved and that the quantities are small and scattered.
Those were the good old days. Was someone talking about deja vue. Several days ago the Russians sold the Iranians nuclear material or whatever the technical term is for, you know, the stuff that we don't want anyone else to have because we know they are going to use it to develop nuclear weapons, even though they swear they want it for nuclear power plants.
Maybe I'll get to live through my second childhood and the good old times I've longed for, for so long, yet. Evidently it's not Israel or one of it's enemies, nor some rogue African nation, nor even China that is the big threat today, but just as it always was, the Russians. Of course, now they are no longer communists, but just like us, and they are our friends now, too. LOL