.
I agree. I think the Bush admin missed a huge opportunity prior to the Iraq war to support the movement for change in Iran. Unfortunately, the recent approach of the US has caused the extremist element to take a greater hold in Iran and slow change and progress.I don't think that there is much that can be done. Iran was (note: was) quite progressive and on top of offering a good education to the people. It is different now but the populace, from what I've heard, retains a great deal of what we would call "progressiveness". Giving them a reason to vote in anger against "The West" would not be a good idea, but their current looney is dangerous.
I wish it were easy, but it ain't. Geopolitics generally lends itself to wishful thinking but a deeply challenging reality.
you reap what you sow or as the CIA puts it; "blowback"I agree. I think the Bush admin missed a huge opportunity prior to the Iraq war to support the movement for change in Iran. Unfortunately, the recent approach of the US has caused the extremist element to take a greater hold in Iran and slow change and progress.
It seems too late to go down that road.
For the 1st point:Links?
True enough, but we also need to move forward and we can't change the past.you reap what you sow or as the CIA puts it; "blowback"
Your first "point" is from an unidentified source and under closer scrutiny turns out to have little substance and reeks of Cheney's hand in an effort, once again, to lie and imply a way to a US military strike. There was no evidence that the Iranian govt. was involved in funneling wepons to the Taliban...in fact this notion is pretty much nonsensical as the Iranian regime has long been a staunch opponent of the Taliban, and in fact have offered intelligence in years past 2002 and the early days of NATO's move into Afghanistan, to the West.Iran is becoming a real pain in the ass of the Middle East and I wondering how people think this is going to play out versus how they think it should play out.
A few examples of troubling things:
- NATO just caught Iran red handed supplying weapons to the Taliban and potenially to the Iraqi Shiites.
- The recent actions in the Gaza are probably also supported by Iran given their close ties to Hamas.
- Iran is still pushing ahead with development of nuclear weapons.
Thoughts?
I agree.I don't think that there is much that can be done.
"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it"True enough, but we also need to move forward and we can't change the past.
Yes, as pointed out and as usual, you have provided ZERO backing to your claims.Iran is becoming a real pain in the ass of the Middle East and I wondering how people think this is going to play out versus how they think it should play out.
A few examples of troubling things:
- NATO just caught Iran red handed supplying weapons to the Taliban and potenially to the Iraqi Shiites.
- The recent actions in the Gaza are probably also supported by Iran given their close ties to Hamas.
- Iran is still pushing ahead with development of nuclear weapons.
Thoughts?
Hersh: CIA Analysis Finds Iran Not Developing Nuclear Weapons
Agence France-Presse
Sunday 19 November 2006
Washington - A classified draft CIA assessment has found no firm evidence of a secret drive by Iran to develop nuclear weapons, as alleged by the White House, a top US investigative reporter has said.
Seymour Hersh, writing in an article for the November 27 issue of the magazine The New Yorker released in advance, reported on whether the administration of Republican President George W. Bush was more, or less, inclined to attack Iran after Democrats won control of Congress last week.
A month before the November 7 legislative elections, Hersh wrote, Vice President Dick Cheney attended a national-security discussion that touched on the impact of Democratic victory in both chambers on Iran policy.
"If the Democrats won on November 7th, the vice president said, that victory would not stop the administration from pursuing a military option with Iran," Hersh wrote, citing a source familiar with the discussion.
Cheney said the White House would circumvent any legislative restrictions "and thus stop Congress from getting in its way," he said.
The Democratic victory unleashed a surge of calls for the Bush administration to begin direct talks with Iran.
But the administration's planning of a military option was made "far more complicated" in recent months by a highly classified draft assessment by the Central Intelligence Agency "challenging the White House's assumptions about how close Iran might be to building a nuclear bomb," he wrote.
"The CIA found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency," Hersh wrote, adding the CIA had declined to comment on that story.
As for Iran in Gaza I couldn't even find and accusation of this.No evidence Iran supplying Taliban-NATO general
05 Jun 2007 12:27:56 GMT
Source: Reuters
By Jim Loney
KABUL, June 5 (Reuters) - While Iranian mortar rounds and other weapons have been found on Afghan battlefields there is no evidence that Tehran is supplying weapons to the Taliban, the U.S. general who leads the NATO war effort in the country said on Tuesday.
Read the story from ABC that I posted. Or you can read these ones:Yes, as pointed out and as usual, you have provided ZERO backing to your claims.
Nobody said Iran was in Gaza.As for Iran in Gaza I couldn't even find and accusation of this.
Nobody said Iran was in Gaza.![]()
As usual you will do your best to sow false confusion rather than answer. You know what I meant but you insist on arguing by nit picking style rather than with facts. Could it be you are afraid of facts?I
- The recent actions in the Gaza are probably also supported by Iran given their close ties to Hamas.
That is far from nit picking. There is a HUGE difference between Iran being in Gaza and Iran providing weapons and logistical support to Humas who are in Gaza.As usual you will do your best to sow false confusion rather than answer. You know what I meant but you insist on arguing by nit picking style rather than with facts. Could it be you are afraid of facts?.
I guess you think Iran is more credible. OK... well let's quote their President:As for your article link. I don't trust the state department to tell the truth on this issue. Let's see how this plays out over time as the US seems to make a lot of baseless accusations of late, starting with but now where near limited to:WMDs in Iraq and uranium in Niger.(Bet you fell for those! :lmao: ) If the US has real evidence they will present it. More likely they are lying yet again.
You think American Generals are not credible.I guess you think Iran is more credible. OK... well let's quote their President:
{sarcasm} of course the general is full of BS as evidenced by the bigoted ramblings of Iran's PM.{/sarcasm}While Iranian mortar rounds and other weapons have been found on Afghan battlefields there is no evidence that Tehran is supplying weapons to the Taliban, the U.S. general who leads the NATO war effort in the country said on Tuesday.
So your souce is the US government?There's irrefutable evidence the Iranians are now doing this," said Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns on CNN.
How about the remote controlled surface to ship missile that Hezbollah used to sink an Israeli ship? How about all the rockets they used against Israel. Sure they are a different group, but they are obviously using Hamas to the same end.I have seen plenty of evidence of moral support, a some evidence of financial support, and (so far) ZERO evidence of weapons support.
Care to offer up any?