SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: michael97123 who wrote (118697)6/9/2005 10:29:20 AM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (2) of 793844
 
Iran, IMHO is a little more dangerous for the following reasons:

1. Israel is NOT going to let them go nuclear. Right now we are holding Israel at bay, but if they feel we and Europe are not up to the task, then they will strike. This will cause all hell to break out in the middle east and we would find ourselves smack dab in the middle of it. I dont accept that even israel thinks a strike to be wise policy or even if they do tactically possible by her alone.


Not only is Israel not going to let Iran get nukes, neither is the US.

Diplomacy is useless. There are therefore two options--military force and passivity. Israel does not have the luxury of choosing the second option. The ultimate question is this one: If Israel uses force, and it will or risk national destruction, what will the US do in view of the fact that the perception will be that Israel was America's cat's paw?

We will be damned regardless of what happens, perhaps suffer an oil boycott. Since we will be blamed for the attack anyway, we might as well participate in it by helping the Israelis do a decent job of it.

The sale of bunker busters to Israel did not escape my notice.

And that is the hard core cynical bottom line.

Look for the attack to hapapen sooner than later.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext