Who will we attack next?

Chris OConnor · Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 10:18 pm Post subject: Who will we attack next?

Who will we attack next?

Results (total votes = 7):


Syria	1 / 14.3%

Iran	6 / 85.7%

Poland	0 / 0.0 %

N. Korea	0 / 0.0%

Libya	0 / 0.0%

Niall001 · Posted: Fri Sep 08, 2006 10:40 am Post subject: ?

What, no France?

funda62 · Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:45 am Post subject: Re: ?

Quote:
What, no France?

Funda

Rich206 · Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 6:03 pm Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

Well, I think Poland is off the table for now. Libya gave up its WMD project and is often used as an example of a positive result of the administration's policy of preemption, so that's pretty unlikely too.

Attacking North Korea would probably be something of a disaster for South Korea, since North Korea maintains the ability to strike Seoul with artillery just north of the DMZ. I don't see South Korea getting onboard with an attack, and I'm quite certain that China would object rather strenuously. Barring clear and indisputable evidence that North Korea was exporting weapons-grade uranium or plutonium, I doubt very much that Bush would be inclined to stir up that particular hornet's nest.

Iran, on the other hand, might not be that unlikely. It is perhaps more unlikely given the ongoing war in Iraq, but I've read that Bush is pretty determined to stop their nuclear program and it would seem that the Israelis are equally determined.

At times it almost seems to me as if the Iranian president is egging Bush on to attack. Such an attack would almost certainly be limited almost entirely to air strikes, since Iran is too large demographically to occupy (and we are too overstretched in any case.) It would likely rally Iranians around their government, which would be pretty much the opposite of what we want. I've read that there is an entire generation of Iranians - presumably those too young to remember the Shah - who have very positive views of the US. (Actually I read that before the invasion of Iraq, so I don't know how valid it is now.)

I am very dubious of the claims of air power enthusiasts that air power alone can be effective, Kosovo notwithstanding. Also, the Iranians aren't exactly without countermeasures. They could stir up trouble in Iraq - as if there isn't enough already - or incite more unrest in Lebanon. They could fire cruise missiles at ships in the Persian Gulf or lay mines in the Strait of Hormuz. They could also fire ballistic missiles at Saudi Arabia's oil facilities. Even if they didn't hit anything, the cost of oil would skyrocket.

Of course, there were a lot of reasons why attacking and occupying an Arab country at the head of the Persian Gulf wasn't such a bright idea, but that didn't deter us.

I'm not sure there is any military solution that will prevent the spread of WMDs. Countries with the necessary industrial and scientific infrastructure combined with sufficient determination may be able to acquire such weapons whether we want them to or not.

I've read that one of the justifications for the PNAC crowd's determination to transform the Middle East is a belief that the spread of WMDs cannot be indefinitely prevented, so we should attempt to change such regimes into countries more to our liking.

I don't believe that it's possible to "transform" other countries through the use of military force. I don't believe that we can impose the values of the Enlightenment - values that are increasingly under assault here in the US - on other cultures through the use of force. I do believe it is possible for other cultures to choose to adopt these ideas or develop similar ones themselves, but it will probably be a very long, slow process that will only be delayed by our attempting to interfere militarily.

In the meantime, we should do what we can to promote the spread of these ideas through measures that are not counterproductive. Embracing the values of the Enlightenment more firmly here at home and standing for those values abroad - even when it’s not the simplest or most immediately satisfying solution - might be a good place to start.

Edited by: Rich206 at: 11/17/06 6:13 pm

jjacobs43 · Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2006 7:07 pm Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

Quote:
I've read that there is an entire generation of Iranians - presumably those too young to remember the Shah - who have very positive views of the US. (Actually I read that before the invasion of Iraq, so I don't know how valid it is now.)

Ted Koppel has a special on the Discovery Channel this Sunday where he examines the Iranian viewpoint of the US. Should be interesting to try to gain a perspective on what they think of us. God knows we've given them plenty of reasons to not trust us.

dsc.discovery.com/tvlistings/episode.jsp?episode=0&cpi=25391&gid=0& channel=DSC

Edited by: jjacobs43 at: 11/17/06 7:08 pm

Rich206 · Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2006 6:44 pm Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

Quote:
Ted Koppel has a special on the Discovery Channel this Sunday where he examines the Iranian viewpoint of the US. Should be interesting to try to gain a perspective on what they think of us. God knows we've given them plenty of reasons to not trust us. dsc.discovery.com/tvlistings/episode.jsp?episode=0&cpi=25391&gid=0&cha nnel=DSC

Thanks for the heads up. It sounds like an interesting program.

Chris OConnor · Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:26 am Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

Rich, that was an awesome post. You're a clear thinker for sure.

I hope one of you posts here after watching that Discovery Channel show on how the Iranians view the United States. I probably won't be able to see it as I work most Sundays. Maybe I'll record it. But that link you provided didn't work and I failed at locating the exact time slot for the show.

Chris OConnor · Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:28 am Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

dsc.discovery.com/convergence/koppel/iran/people/people.html?clik=fsma in_feat1

Chris OConnor · Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:31 am Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

Hey, those videos are available right now! I need to go to sleep but now I'm getting into this stuff. ::17

Rich206 · Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:47 am Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

There is a lengthy article by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker that addresses the Iranian situation, although he doesn't really draw any conclusions about the likelihood of an attack. Hersh had previously written of an attack on Iran as if it was a foregone conclusion.

I was concerned to read that, according to Hersh, the administration has been hostile to a CIA report that "challenged the White House's assumptions of how close Iran might be to building a nuclear bomb" and has shown more interest in Israeli claims of human intelligence sources operating inside Iran and reporting Iranian experiments with trigger devices for a nuclear bomb. It sounded disturbingly like the claims of "cherry picking" intelligence on Iraqi WMD programs.

Hersh seems to think that the likelihood of an attack is closely related to how influential Cheney remains after the losses in the election, the exit of Rumsfeld and the return of Bush 41's people in the form of Gates and the Iraq Study Group headed by Baker. Hersh reports Cheney saying, "victory [of the Democrats] would not stop the Administration from pursuing a military option with Iran" -- but that was a month before the election actually happened (and I think Rumsfeld was still expected to stay at that point).

Hersh also reports that the Iraq Study Group will recommend that Bush reach out to Iran and Syria and call for a regional conference to help stabilize Iraq. I don't know how likely Bush is to take that advice, having labeled Iran part of the "axis of evil." Of course, as Hersh notes, there's no guarantee that Iran would be interested in helping Bush out even if he does take that approach.

Meanwhile, Syria and Iran are making moves of their own. I've been reading Associated Press reports about the visit of the Syrian Foreign Minister to Iraq and the announcement that diplomatic relations between the two countries would be restored. Now the Iranian president is inviting the Syrians and Iraqis for a visit. It would seem that Iran intends to play the role of regional power broker. I suspect that Bush might find that intolerable and consider Iranian involvement acceptable only on his terms.

Quote:
Rich, that was an awesome post. You're a clear thinker for sure.

I hope one of you posts here after watching that Discovery Channel show on how the Iranians view the United States. I probably won't be able to see it as I work most Sundays. Maybe I'll record it. But that link you provided didn't work and I failed at locating the exact time slot for the show.

Thanks, I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit, especially since, like Hersh, I thought an attack on Iran was inevitable until recently. That got me to thinking about some of the larger issues involved. Whatever short-term successes military action might bring, I think we need to consider the long-term impact our actions have in breeding resentment and encouraging extremism in the region.

(I missed the Discovery show, but I’m going to watch it online.)

jjacobs43 · Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 1:30 pm Post subject: Re: Who will we attack next?

Quote:
Thanks, I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit, especially since, like Hersh, I thought an attack on Iran was inevitable until recently. That got me to thinking about some of the larger issues involved. Whatever short-term successes military action might bring, I think we need to consider the long-term impact our actions have in breeding resentment and encouraging extremism in the region.

Hersh came and spoke here in Seattle last month and it was quite interesting to hear him speak freely to questions as opposed to television interviews. He's been on this "we're going to attack Iran" thought for awhile and while it still hasn't come to fruition, it's hard not to think that there has to be something to it coming from a man with such good inside sources. He claims that the recent bombing of Lebanon by Israel was a precursor to us bombing Iran because we needed to try to prevent a retalitory strike from Hezbollah against Israel. Combine that with reports I've seen of our ships being delployed in the area (www.globalresearch.ca/ind...leId=3696) and the talk about bunker busting bombs and it seems like a very real possibility.

As for the Koppel show, I watched the first 3rd of it on Tivo last night and what struck me was how similar the Iranian President is to Bush. They paint him as fairly imcompetent about world affairs but yet he really appeals to a "religous base" in Iran because of his fanatic statements against the U.S. To us, Iran is part of the "Axis of Evil". To them, the U.S. is the "Great Satan". Luckily, he doesn't have complete control and seems to be surrounded by more logical thinkers.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT