Difference between revisions of "Potential US attack on Iran"
(→Links: discussion from Brin; more links) |
(→Links: generals will quit) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
[[category:United States issues]]There is persistent discussion of a possible {{USA}} invasion of [[Iran]], despite there being at least a few obvious and powerful reasons against and no compelling reasons in favor.{{seed}} | [[category:United States issues]]There is persistent discussion of a possible {{USA}} invasion of [[Iran]], despite there being at least a few obvious and powerful reasons against and no compelling reasons in favor.{{seed}} | ||
==Links== | ==Links== | ||
+ | * '''2007-02-25''' [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack] | ||
* '''2006-11-22''' [http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-muravchik19nov19,0,1681154.story?coll=la-opinion-center Bomb Iran] by Joshua Muravchik | * '''2006-11-22''' [http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-muravchik19nov19,0,1681154.story?coll=la-opinion-center Bomb Iran] by Joshua Muravchik | ||
* '''2006-11-20''' [http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/061127fa_fact The Next Act] by Seymour M. Hersh: inside notes on the [[43rd US Presidential administration|administration]]'s Iran strategy, both pre- and post- [[2006-11 US election|election]] | * '''2006-11-20''' [http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/061127fa_fact The Next Act] by Seymour M. Hersh: inside notes on the [[43rd US Presidential administration|administration]]'s Iran strategy, both pre- and post- [[2006-11 US election|election]] | ||
Line 7: | Line 8: | ||
* '''2006-05-04''' [http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/35707/ The Intelligence War Over Iran] by Robert Parry, TomPaine.com: "Intelligence Czar John Negroponte splashes cold water on the [[Bush neoconservative|neocon]]s who are hot to attack Iran" | * '''2006-05-04''' [http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/35707/ The Intelligence War Over Iran] by Robert Parry, TomPaine.com: "Intelligence Czar John Negroponte splashes cold water on the [[Bush neoconservative|neocon]]s who are hot to attack Iran" | ||
* '''2006-01-17''' [http://www.oilempire.us/iran.html coming soon: the neo-cons next war...] by Krassimir Petrov | * '''2006-01-17''' [http://www.oilempire.us/iran.html coming soon: the neo-cons next war...] by Krassimir Petrov | ||
+ | |||
==Discussion== | ==Discussion== | ||
From Contrary Brin [http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2006/11/making-better-world-is-not-just-about.html#116414810305955621]: | From Contrary Brin [http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2006/11/making-better-world-is-not-just-about.html#116414810305955621]: |
Revision as of 14:19, 10 March 2007
Overview
There is persistent discussion of a possible United States invasion of Iran, despite there being at least a few obvious and powerful reasons against and no compelling reasons in favor.
This page is a seed article. You can help Issuepedia water it: make a request to expand a given page and/or donate to help give us more writing-hours!
|
Links
- 2007-02-25 US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack
- 2006-11-22 Bomb Iran by Joshua Muravchik
- 2006-11-20 The Next Act by Seymour M. Hersh: inside notes on the administration's Iran strategy, both pre- and post- election
- 2006-09-26 Why Bush Will Nuke Iran by Paul Craig Roberts
- 2006-05-04 The Intelligence War Over Iran by Robert Parry, TomPaine.com: "Intelligence Czar John Negroponte splashes cold water on the neocons who are hot to attack Iran"
- 2006-01-17 coming soon: the neo-cons next war... by Krassimir Petrov
Discussion
From Contrary Brin [1]:
Russ Daggatt said: |
These people really, truly are insane. The same Joshua Muravchik (a “resident scholar” at the American Enterprise Institute) quoted above has an op-ed piece in the LA Times titled simply and honestly "Bomb Iran". Among the insights of this 'scholar":
This crazy man, who is getting ink in Foreign Policy and the op-ed page of the LA Times, doesn’t even seem to be aware that the president of Iran, far from being a dictator, isn’t even particularly powerful in that government. As Scott Ritter notes in the New Republic ("The Case for Engagement"):
More than two-thirds of the population of Iran is under 30. Unlike North Korea or Iraq under Saddam, the people of Iran are not isolated from the rest of the world. Iranian youth, in particular, are quite Westernized. Before Bush deemed Iran part of the "Axis of Evil" (a watershed event in the relations between the US and Iran) reformers were on the ascendancy in Iran. After teetering for years and almost toppling before liberalizing pressure, the hardliners have benefited from Bush’s blunders and belligerence (even in our country, people tilt toward the hardliners when they feel threatened by external forces). Unless we do more really stupid things, like bombing Iran, it is probably just a matter of time before the clerics lose power. As the Washington Post reported last June:
Think of it this way. Bush will have squandered thousands of American lives and a trillion dollars, destroying US military readiness in the process, in order to take out Iran's two main rivals, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam in Iraq. AND HE GOT NOTHING FROM IRAN IN RETURN! In addition to making Iran the dominant power in the region, he managed to undermine the reformers in that country. AND actually made our relationship with Iran WORSE. Now THAT is diplomatic skill! Potential US attack on Iran/excerpt |