Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (173560)	7/14/2006 7:50:57 AM
From: carranza2	Respond to of 793835

The problem, as I see it, is that getting to the nuclear stuff in effective way, i.e., one that puts the Iranians behind in their eforts for more than a year or two, will be extraordinarily difficult. They've lerned the Osirak lesson. It's a hell of a problem. And the American people will simply not support another invasion. Israel can do a lot of the work by seriously hurting Hizbollah and by decimating Syria. This would be the only things that would get the Iranian's attention. But I suspect that Syria and Iran have some sort of mutual protection deal worked out. The Iranians have planned this for a very long time. They have something up their sleeve. Who knows, perhaps the cult in charge of their government truly thinks it is time for the Mahdi to return and thus time for the larger conflagration. As one comment made it clear, they believe the US is politically paralyzed--which may be true--and they were counting on Olmert being inexperienced and thus indecisive. I think the Israelis are making a mistake in one respect, however. By holding the Lebanese government responsible, who can't control Hizbollah, they are undermining the US's democratization efforts in the ME. Perhaps the thinking is to force the Lebanese government to deal with Hizbollah, but that is not something it is capable of doing.