Sabre Rattling in the Persian Gulf
Mohammad Gill February 19, 2007
#44 Posted by SR on February 23, 2007 4:22:04 pm
Re: # 37 zeemax {``...What Ahmedinejad talked about, ... was `erasing the map` of Israel, and not `wiping Israel off the map`...``}
Perhaps you are trying to say what Virginia Tilley has said most eloquently in the article titled Putting Words in Ahmadinejad`s Mouth.
Professot Tilly writes, ``The most infamous quote, ``Israel must be wiped off the map``, is the most glaringly wrong. In his October 2005 speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad never used the word ``map`` or the term ``wiped off``. According to Farsi-language experts like Juan Cole and even right-wing services like MEMRI, what he actually said was ``this regime that is occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.``
What did he mean? In this speech to an annual anti-Zionist conference, Mr. Ahmadinejad was being prophetic, not threatening. He was citing Imam Khomeini, who said this line in the 1980s (a period when Israel was actually selling arms to Iran, so apparently it was not viewed as so ghastly then).
...SR
Perhaps you are trying to say what Virginia Tilley has said most eloquently in the article titled Putting Words in Ahmadinejad`s Mouth.
Professot Tilly writes, ``The most infamous quote, ``Israel must be wiped off the map``, is the most glaringly wrong. In his October 2005 speech, Mr. Ahmadinejad never used the word ``map`` or the term ``wiped off``. According to Farsi-language experts like Juan Cole and even right-wing services like MEMRI, what he actually said was ``this regime that is occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.``
What did he mean? In this speech to an annual anti-Zionist conference, Mr. Ahmadinejad was being prophetic, not threatening. He was citing Imam Khomeini, who said this line in the 1980s (a period when Israel was actually selling arms to Iran, so apparently it was not viewed as so ghastly then).
...SR
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#36 Posted by arjun2 on February 23, 2007 6:13:05 am
Love means having to buy billions of $$ of weapons you`ll never use
February 23, 2007
Arab States, Wary of Iran, Add to Their Arsenals but Still Lean on the U.S.
By HASSAN M. FATTAH
ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates, Feb. 22 — As fears grow over the escalating confrontation between Iran and the West, Arab states across the Persian Gulf have begun a rare show of muscle flexing, publicly advertising a shopping spree for new weapons and openly discussing their security concerns.
Typically secretive, the gulf nations have long planned upgrades to their armed forces, but now are speaking openly about them. American military officials say the countries, normally prone to squabbling, have also increased their military cooperation and opened lines of communication to the American military here.
Patriot missile batteries capable of striking down ballistic missiles have been readied in several gulf countries, including Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, analysts say, and increasingly, the states have sought to emphasize their unanimity against Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
“There has always been an acknowledgment of the threat in the region, but the volume of the debate has now risen,” said one United Arab Emirates official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the subject. “Now the message is there’s a dialogue going on with Iran, but that doesn’t mean I don’t intend to defend myself.”
The Persian Gulf monarchies and sheikdoms, mostly small and vulnerable, have long relied on the United States to protect them. The United States Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain; the United States Central Command is based in nearby Qatar; and the Navy has long relied on docking facilities in the United Arab Emirates, which has one of the region’s deepest water ports at Jebel Ali.
The United States, too, has begun a significant expansion of forces in the gulf, with a second United States aircraft carrier battle group led by the John C. Stennis now in the Persian Gulf and with minesweeping ships.
The expansion has helped calm fears among gulf governments that the United States could pull out of the region in the future, even as it has raised concerns about a potential American confrontation with Iran, accidental or intentional.
As tensions with Iran rise, many gulf countries have come to see themselves as the likely first targets of an Iranian attack. Some have grown more concerned that the United States may be overstretched militarily, many analysts say, while almost all the monarchies, flush with cash as a result of high oil prices, have sought to build a military deterrent of their own.
“The message is first, ‘U.S., stay involved here,’ and second, ‘Iran, we will maintain a technological edge no matter what,’ ” said Emile el-Hokayem, research fellow at the Henry L. Stimson Center, a research center based in Washington. “They are trying to reinforce the credibility of the threat of force.”
Military officials from throughout the region descended this week on the Idex military trade fair, a semiannual event that has become the region’s largest arms market, drawing nearly 900 weapons makers from around the world. They came ready to update their military capacities and air and naval defenses. They also came armed with a veiled message of resolve.
“We believe there is a need for power to protect peace, and strong people with the capability to respond are the real protectors of peace,” said Sheik Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, the president of the United Arab Emirates and ruler of the emirate of Abu Dhabi, at the exposition. “That is why we are keen to maintain the efficiency of our armed forces.”
The Persian Gulf has been a lucrative market for arms. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Oman spend up to 10 percent of their gross domestic product on the military, amounting to nearly $21 billion, $4 billion and $2.7 billion, respectively, estimates John Kenkel, senior director of Jane’s Strategic Advisory Services.
If they follow through on the deals announced recently, it is estimated that countries like the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman and Saudi Arabia will spend up to $60 billion this year. The biggest buyer in 2006, according to the defense industry journal Defense News, was Saudi Arabia, which has agreed to buy 72 Eurofighter Typhoon combat jets for $11 billion. It also has a $400 million deal to upgrade 12 Apache AH-64A helicopters to the Longbow standard. The kingdom also reportedly plans to acquire cruise missiles, attack helicopters and tanks, all for a total of $50 billion.
Kuwait reportedly bought 24 Apache Longbow helicopters, while the United Arab Emirates has continued to take delivery of 80 F-16 Block 60 fighters, with plans to buy air tankers, missile defense batteries and airborne early warning systems. Bahrain ordered nine UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters in an estimated $252 million deal, while Oman reportedly bought 30 antitank rocket launchers in a $48 million purchase and is planning a naval overhaul.
“It is a message to enemies that ‘We are taking defense seriously,’ ” Mr. Kenkel said, emphasizing that the new arms were for deterrence.
“If the U.S. ever does pull back, these countries in the gulf have realized, they may have to fend for themselves,” Mr. Kenkel said. “As the Boy Scouts say, always be prepared.”
The most marked change is in the public nature of the acquisitions, which previously would have been kept secret, many analysts here said, itself a form of deterrence.
“They have been doing these kinds of purchases since the ’90s,” said Marwan Lahoud, chief executive of the European missile maker MBDA. “What has changed is they are stating it publicly. The other side is making pronouncements so they have to as well,” he said, speaking of Iran’s recent announcements about its weapons capacity.
Senior United States military officials say gulf countries have become more nervous as Iran has conducted naval maneuvers, especially near the Straits of Hormuz, the main artery through which two-fifths of the world’s oil reaches markets.
“A year ago you could have characterized the interaction with the Iranians as professional,” said Vice Adm. Patrick Walsh, departing commander of the Fifth Fleet. “What’s different today has been the number and amount of exercises and the proximity of those exercises to the Straits of Hormuz themselves.”
The exercises were among the reasons for the expansion of Navy forces in the region, he said, but have also raised alarm about the potential for accidents to lead to an unintended war.
Admiral Walsh said that American warships remained in international waters, and that Iranian and American ships kept close watch on one another. Some critics of the Bush administration have alleged that the increased military presence in the gulf risks igniting a conflict.
Admiral Walsh said the increased American presence was aimed at o reassuring gulf states that the United States remained committed to their security, but also welcomed their efforts to build deterrence.
“We have found that we need to be physically present to prevent such armed behavior,” he said of the Iranian maneuvers. “We’re mindful we’re not giving up any water, but also being careful not to take a provocative stance.”
February 23, 2007
Arab States, Wary of Iran, Add to Their Arsenals but Still Lean on the U.S.
By HASSAN M. FATTAH
ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates, Feb. 22 — As fears grow over the escalating confrontation between Iran and the West, Arab states across the Persian Gulf have begun a rare show of muscle flexing, publicly advertising a shopping spree for new weapons and openly discussing their security concerns.
Typically secretive, the gulf nations have long planned upgrades to their armed forces, but now are speaking openly about them. American military officials say the countries, normally prone to squabbling, have also increased their military cooperation and opened lines of communication to the American military here.
Patriot missile batteries capable of striking down ballistic missiles have been readied in several gulf countries, including Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, analysts say, and increasingly, the states have sought to emphasize their unanimity against Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
“There has always been an acknowledgment of the threat in the region, but the volume of the debate has now risen,” said one United Arab Emirates official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the subject. “Now the message is there’s a dialogue going on with Iran, but that doesn’t mean I don’t intend to defend myself.”
The Persian Gulf monarchies and sheikdoms, mostly small and vulnerable, have long relied on the United States to protect them. The United States Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain; the United States Central Command is based in nearby Qatar; and the Navy has long relied on docking facilities in the United Arab Emirates, which has one of the region’s deepest water ports at Jebel Ali.
The United States, too, has begun a significant expansion of forces in the gulf, with a second United States aircraft carrier battle group led by the John C. Stennis now in the Persian Gulf and with minesweeping ships.
The expansion has helped calm fears among gulf governments that the United States could pull out of the region in the future, even as it has raised concerns about a potential American confrontation with Iran, accidental or intentional.
As tensions with Iran rise, many gulf countries have come to see themselves as the likely first targets of an Iranian attack. Some have grown more concerned that the United States may be overstretched militarily, many analysts say, while almost all the monarchies, flush with cash as a result of high oil prices, have sought to build a military deterrent of their own.
“The message is first, ‘U.S., stay involved here,’ and second, ‘Iran, we will maintain a technological edge no matter what,’ ” said Emile el-Hokayem, research fellow at the Henry L. Stimson Center, a research center based in Washington. “They are trying to reinforce the credibility of the threat of force.”
Military officials from throughout the region descended this week on the Idex military trade fair, a semiannual event that has become the region’s largest arms market, drawing nearly 900 weapons makers from around the world. They came ready to update their military capacities and air and naval defenses. They also came armed with a veiled message of resolve.
“We believe there is a need for power to protect peace, and strong people with the capability to respond are the real protectors of peace,” said Sheik Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, the president of the United Arab Emirates and ruler of the emirate of Abu Dhabi, at the exposition. “That is why we are keen to maintain the efficiency of our armed forces.”
The Persian Gulf has been a lucrative market for arms. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Oman spend up to 10 percent of their gross domestic product on the military, amounting to nearly $21 billion, $4 billion and $2.7 billion, respectively, estimates John Kenkel, senior director of Jane’s Strategic Advisory Services.
If they follow through on the deals announced recently, it is estimated that countries like the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman and Saudi Arabia will spend up to $60 billion this year. The biggest buyer in 2006, according to the defense industry journal Defense News, was Saudi Arabia, which has agreed to buy 72 Eurofighter Typhoon combat jets for $11 billion. It also has a $400 million deal to upgrade 12 Apache AH-64A helicopters to the Longbow standard. The kingdom also reportedly plans to acquire cruise missiles, attack helicopters and tanks, all for a total of $50 billion.
Kuwait reportedly bought 24 Apache Longbow helicopters, while the United Arab Emirates has continued to take delivery of 80 F-16 Block 60 fighters, with plans to buy air tankers, missile defense batteries and airborne early warning systems. Bahrain ordered nine UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters in an estimated $252 million deal, while Oman reportedly bought 30 antitank rocket launchers in a $48 million purchase and is planning a naval overhaul.
“It is a message to enemies that ‘We are taking defense seriously,’ ” Mr. Kenkel said, emphasizing that the new arms were for deterrence.
“If the U.S. ever does pull back, these countries in the gulf have realized, they may have to fend for themselves,” Mr. Kenkel said. “As the Boy Scouts say, always be prepared.”
The most marked change is in the public nature of the acquisitions, which previously would have been kept secret, many analysts here said, itself a form of deterrence.
“They have been doing these kinds of purchases since the ’90s,” said Marwan Lahoud, chief executive of the European missile maker MBDA. “What has changed is they are stating it publicly. The other side is making pronouncements so they have to as well,” he said, speaking of Iran’s recent announcements about its weapons capacity.
Senior United States military officials say gulf countries have become more nervous as Iran has conducted naval maneuvers, especially near the Straits of Hormuz, the main artery through which two-fifths of the world’s oil reaches markets.
“A year ago you could have characterized the interaction with the Iranians as professional,” said Vice Adm. Patrick Walsh, departing commander of the Fifth Fleet. “What’s different today has been the number and amount of exercises and the proximity of those exercises to the Straits of Hormuz themselves.”
The exercises were among the reasons for the expansion of Navy forces in the region, he said, but have also raised alarm about the potential for accidents to lead to an unintended war.
Admiral Walsh said that American warships remained in international waters, and that Iranian and American ships kept close watch on one another. Some critics of the Bush administration have alleged that the increased military presence in the gulf risks igniting a conflict.
Admiral Walsh said the increased American presence was aimed at o reassuring gulf states that the United States remained committed to their security, but also welcomed their efforts to build deterrence.
“We have found that we need to be physically present to prevent such armed behavior,” he said of the Iranian maneuvers. “We’re mindful we’re not giving up any water, but also being careful not to take a provocative stance.”
#35 Posted by arjun2 on February 23, 2007 6:02:02 am
#34 Posted by freethinker on February 23, 2007 5:16:53 am
The U.S. seems to be over hyping the Iran nuclear program. Read the following report from today`s Guardian Unlimited. It is reminiscent of the run up to Iraqi war.
Mohammad Gill
US intelligence on Iran does not stand up, say Vienna sources
· Tip-offs did not lead to signs of banned activity
· IAEA report raises pressure for new sanctions
Julian Borger in Vienna
Friday February 23, 2007
The Guardian
A Tehran student supports the nuclear programme
A Tehran student supports the nuclear programme. Photograph: Behrouz Mehri/AFP/Getty
Much of the intelligence on Iran`s nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by American spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, according to diplomatic sources in Vienna.
The claims, reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war, coincided with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran was defying a UN security council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear programme.
That report, delivered to the security council by the IAEA director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, sets the stage for a fierce international debate on the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran, and raises the possibility that the US might resort to military action against Iranian nuclear sites.
Article continues
At the heart of the debate are accusations, spearheaded by the US, that Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons. However, most of the tip-offs about supposed secret weapons sites provided by the CIA and other US intelligence agencies have led to dead ends when investigated by IAEA inspectors, according to informed sources in Vienna.
``Most of it has turned out to be incorrect,`` said a diplomat at the IAEA with detailed knowledge of the agency`s investigations. ``They gave us a paper with a list of sites. [The inspectors] did some follow-up, they went to some military sites, but there was no sign of [banned nuclear] activities.``
``Now [the inspectors] don`t go in blindly. Only if it passes a credibility test.``
One particularly contentious issue concerned records of plans to build a nuclear warhead, which the CIA said it found on a stolen laptop computer supplied by an informant inside Iran. In July 2005, US intelligence officials showed printed versions of the material to IAEA officials, who judged it to be sufficiently specific to confront Iran.
Tehran rejected the material as forgeries and there are still reservations about its authenticity in the IAEA, according to officials with knowledge of the internal debate inside the agency.
``First of all, if you have a clandestine programme, you don`t put it on laptops which can walk away,`` one official said. ``The data is all in English which may be reasonable for some of the technical matters, but at some point you`d have thought there would be at least some notes in Farsi. So there is some doubt over the provenance of the computer.``
IAEA officials do not comment on intelligence passed to the watchdog agency by foreign governments, saying all such assistance is confidential.
A western counter-proliferation official accepted that intelligence on Iran had sometimes been patchy but argued that the essential point was Iran`s failure to live up to its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty.
``I take on board on what they`re saying, but the bottom line is that for nearly 20 years [the Iranians] were violating safeguards agreements,`` the official said. ``There is a confidence deficit here about the regime`s true intentions.``
That deficit will be deepened by yesterday`s IAEA report. It concluded bluntly: ``Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities``, in defiance of a December UN ultimatum to stop. The report noted that Iran had continued with the operation of a pilot enrichment plant.
Furthermore, the report said that Iran had informed the agency of its plan to install 18 arrays, or cascades, of 164 centrifuges in an underground plant by May - a total of nearly 3,000. At the moment, Iran`s centrifuges are being used to make low-enriched uranium, but if they were switched to making highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium, they could produce enough for a bomb in less than a year.
Dr ElBaradei`s report said that Iran had so far not agreed to the IAEA installing remote monitoring devices in the enrichment plant to keep constant tabs on what the Iranians were doing with them.
Furthermore, the IAEA still has a string of questions about the Iranian programme that remain unanswered. Until they are, the agency will not give Iran a clear bill of health.
One of the ``outstanding issues`` listed in yesterday`s report involves a 15-page document that appears to have been handed to IAEA inspectors by mistake in October 2005. That document roughly describes how to make hemispheres of enriched uranium, for which the only known use is in nuclear warheads. Iran has yet to present a satisfactory explanation of how and why it has the document.
Last night Iran, which says its nuclear fuel programme is designed only to produce electricity, remained defiant. ``Regarding the suspension mentioned in the report, because such a demand has no legal basis and is against international treaties, naturally, it could not be accepted by Iran,`` Muhammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran`s Atomic Energy Organisation, told Reuters in Tehran. Mr Saeedi said the report showed that returning to talks was the best way to resolve the dispute.
The UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said he was ``deeply concerned``. ``I urge again that the Iranian government should fully comply with the demands as soon as possible and engage in negotiations with the international community so that we can resolve this issue peacefully.``
Mohammad Gill
US intelligence on Iran does not stand up, say Vienna sources
· Tip-offs did not lead to signs of banned activity
· IAEA report raises pressure for new sanctions
Julian Borger in Vienna
Friday February 23, 2007
The Guardian
A Tehran student supports the nuclear programme
A Tehran student supports the nuclear programme. Photograph: Behrouz Mehri/AFP/Getty
Much of the intelligence on Iran`s nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by American spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, according to diplomatic sources in Vienna.
The claims, reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war, coincided with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran was defying a UN security council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear programme.
That report, delivered to the security council by the IAEA director general, Mohamed ElBaradei, sets the stage for a fierce international debate on the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran, and raises the possibility that the US might resort to military action against Iranian nuclear sites.
Article continues
At the heart of the debate are accusations, spearheaded by the US, that Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons. However, most of the tip-offs about supposed secret weapons sites provided by the CIA and other US intelligence agencies have led to dead ends when investigated by IAEA inspectors, according to informed sources in Vienna.
``Most of it has turned out to be incorrect,`` said a diplomat at the IAEA with detailed knowledge of the agency`s investigations. ``They gave us a paper with a list of sites. [The inspectors] did some follow-up, they went to some military sites, but there was no sign of [banned nuclear] activities.``
``Now [the inspectors] don`t go in blindly. Only if it passes a credibility test.``
One particularly contentious issue concerned records of plans to build a nuclear warhead, which the CIA said it found on a stolen laptop computer supplied by an informant inside Iran. In July 2005, US intelligence officials showed printed versions of the material to IAEA officials, who judged it to be sufficiently specific to confront Iran.
Tehran rejected the material as forgeries and there are still reservations about its authenticity in the IAEA, according to officials with knowledge of the internal debate inside the agency.
``First of all, if you have a clandestine programme, you don`t put it on laptops which can walk away,`` one official said. ``The data is all in English which may be reasonable for some of the technical matters, but at some point you`d have thought there would be at least some notes in Farsi. So there is some doubt over the provenance of the computer.``
IAEA officials do not comment on intelligence passed to the watchdog agency by foreign governments, saying all such assistance is confidential.
A western counter-proliferation official accepted that intelligence on Iran had sometimes been patchy but argued that the essential point was Iran`s failure to live up to its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty.
``I take on board on what they`re saying, but the bottom line is that for nearly 20 years [the Iranians] were violating safeguards agreements,`` the official said. ``There is a confidence deficit here about the regime`s true intentions.``
That deficit will be deepened by yesterday`s IAEA report. It concluded bluntly: ``Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities``, in defiance of a December UN ultimatum to stop. The report noted that Iran had continued with the operation of a pilot enrichment plant.
Furthermore, the report said that Iran had informed the agency of its plan to install 18 arrays, or cascades, of 164 centrifuges in an underground plant by May - a total of nearly 3,000. At the moment, Iran`s centrifuges are being used to make low-enriched uranium, but if they were switched to making highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium, they could produce enough for a bomb in less than a year.
Dr ElBaradei`s report said that Iran had so far not agreed to the IAEA installing remote monitoring devices in the enrichment plant to keep constant tabs on what the Iranians were doing with them.
Furthermore, the IAEA still has a string of questions about the Iranian programme that remain unanswered. Until they are, the agency will not give Iran a clear bill of health.
One of the ``outstanding issues`` listed in yesterday`s report involves a 15-page document that appears to have been handed to IAEA inspectors by mistake in October 2005. That document roughly describes how to make hemispheres of enriched uranium, for which the only known use is in nuclear warheads. Iran has yet to present a satisfactory explanation of how and why it has the document.
Last night Iran, which says its nuclear fuel programme is designed only to produce electricity, remained defiant. ``Regarding the suspension mentioned in the report, because such a demand has no legal basis and is against international treaties, naturally, it could not be accepted by Iran,`` Muhammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran`s Atomic Energy Organisation, told Reuters in Tehran. Mr Saeedi said the report showed that returning to talks was the best way to resolve the dispute.
The UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said he was ``deeply concerned``. ``I urge again that the Iranian government should fully comply with the demands as soon as possible and engage in negotiations with the international community so that we can resolve this issue peacefully.``
#33 Posted by zeemax on February 23, 2007 1:02:47 am
#30
An Alawite Shia married to a Sunni woman president of a 75% Sunni country ..
hehe ... sure there`s a divide.
(The country is Syria since code coolies are not supposed to know)
An Alawite Shia married to a Sunni woman president of a 75% Sunni country ..
hehe ... sure there`s a divide.
(The country is Syria since code coolies are not supposed to know)
#31 Posted by bjkumar on February 22, 2007 9:02:05 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#30 Posted by arjun2 on February 22, 2007 8:41:10 pm
50+ people dead everyday in iraq in sunni-shia violence and there`s no divide...
mmmkay..
mmmkay..
#29 Posted by plats8 on February 22, 2007 8:11:11 pm
Zeemax #28,
Very true. Same goes for the Hindu/Muslim divide - there isn`t one and some people
seem to think there is. Kya karein...
Very true. Same goes for the Hindu/Muslim divide - there isn`t one and some people
seem to think there is. Kya karein...
#28 Posted by zeemax on February 22, 2007 1:00:51 am
#27 by SR
You just broke some injun hearts .. who keep spewing taunts about the shia/sunni divide when there`s none. The Israelis know that, but these injuns don`t.
:~)
You just broke some injun hearts .. who keep spewing taunts about the shia/sunni divide when there`s none. The Israelis know that, but these injuns don`t.
:~)
#27 Posted by SR on February 21, 2007 6:53:13 pm
``The masses of the Arab - indeed the entire Muslim world, both Sunnis and Shiites, will rally around Iran. The Sunni heads of state, who are embracing Israel now in secret, will run away in panic. We shall be left alone to face the revenge that will come sooner or later. Will we be able to rely on the heirs of Bush, who may be less reckless and more inclined to listen to world public opinion, which will inevitably blame us for this whole adventure?``
These are the words of a patriotic Jewish citizen of Israel, an original Aliyah, a member of the Knesset (Israeli parliament) and a contemporary of Ben Gurion. To read his complete article about the dangers of the coming war with Iran, Click here
...SR
#26 Posted by freethinker on February 20, 2007 1:39:07 pm
bjkumar:
I hope you are right.
If one dispassionately assesses the Iraq war, it has failed on all counts. There were no wmds; the experiment with democracy has produced awful schism in the Iraqi society; and there is no reduction in terrorism. In fact, it has significantly increased. I think it`s time for the U.S. to pull the plug on war and to give a chance to peaceful negotiations.
I like your logic on Iranian nuclearization also. If the Middle East were free of nuclear weapons then there could be a strong argument for stopping Iran going nuclear. Two of its neighboring countries, India and Pakistan, are nuclear and Israel, a Middle Eastern country, is nuclear too. But then as I noted in my earlier post, there is no logic in politics.
Too much power is a double-edged sword. The U.S. should be careful how it handles its power. So far, power has done U.S. no good.
Be well,
Mohammad Gill
I hope you are right.
If one dispassionately assesses the Iraq war, it has failed on all counts. There were no wmds; the experiment with democracy has produced awful schism in the Iraqi society; and there is no reduction in terrorism. In fact, it has significantly increased. I think it`s time for the U.S. to pull the plug on war and to give a chance to peaceful negotiations.
I like your logic on Iranian nuclearization also. If the Middle East were free of nuclear weapons then there could be a strong argument for stopping Iran going nuclear. Two of its neighboring countries, India and Pakistan, are nuclear and Israel, a Middle Eastern country, is nuclear too. But then as I noted in my earlier post, there is no logic in politics.
Too much power is a double-edged sword. The U.S. should be careful how it handles its power. So far, power has done U.S. no good.
Be well,
Mohammad Gill
#25 Posted by bjkumar on February 20, 2007 1:01:51 pm
Dr. Gill, from all indications, GWB respects the will of his nation and he is mindful of and only works within the mandate given to him. Therefore, in my view, last November’s election results obviate any Iran-attack scenario, short of another 9/11-like event. Whatever be the President’s own feelings on this issue, his hands are tied by the US Congress – which always reflects the will of the electorate. The Iranians and others know it too and are trying to take advantage of it – the welfare of the population(s) concerned is of no concern to anybody, unfortunately.
I have now become quite pessimistic about Iraq remaining united as one country. Perhaps it never was one country in spirit and was held together through the sheer force of dictatorship anyway.
I am also pessimistic that a nuclear-armed Iran can be prevented – perhaps it has been a certainty the day Pakistan exploded its own – just like India developing that capability was a given ever since China did it.
#24 Posted by arjun2 on February 20, 2007 12:03:05 pm
#23 by zeemax on February 20, 2007 11:55am PT
if you care about your islamic brothers living and dying, what`re you doing leading a life of a paki in the UK...go on..do what your wife did...
if you care about your islamic brothers living and dying, what`re you doing leading a life of a paki in the UK...go on..do what your wife did...
#23 Posted by zeemax on February 20, 2007 11:55:24 am
.....and malik99 ...
Don`t worry about hamidm2. He`s not concerned about anyone living or dying ... but just the two-car garage (or is it three?)
Don`t worry about hamidm2. He`s not concerned about anyone living or dying ... but just the two-car garage (or is it three?)
#22 Posted by zeemax on February 20, 2007 11:53:25 am
#21 by malik99
Actually .. I`m scared that a lot more americans will die. Those 19-20 year olds who never knew what the fkk it was all about ...
Actually .. I`m scared that a lot more americans will die. Those 19-20 year olds who never knew what the fkk it was all about ...
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- Aha_Snark: Re: # 230 usmi... Pleas For Sanity as
- nb: #230 yellow eyed stone... Pleas For Sanity as
- akcheema: Re: # 232; levitate why... Pleas For Sanity as
- nkg: Re: # 4 chalta... this the... I Am A Pakistani
- Levitate: MaheshG ... dead hindoos... Pleas For Sanity as
- MaheshG: What happened in Gujarat... Pleas For Sanity as
- usmi: It is quite interesting... Pleas For Sanity as
- Levitate: nkg... dead hindoos :)... Pleas For Sanity as
