Comments on Persian Fire

Go to STOP THE WARS!! - Add a comment - Go to Persian Fire

Perhaps...

It's because we didn't have anything against the people of Iraq....We haven't stated they or any other Islamic people should be eliminated from the face of the earth like the Islamofascists speak towards Israel.....just a minor difference.....

posted by Corbin_Dallas on December 27, 2005 at 6:17 AM | link to this | reply

Good Discussion...

...gentlemen.

GM - I'm curious to know why Muslim lands joining up against Israel are 'a pack of wolves' whereas Christian lands joining up against Iraq are a coalition?

Just curious.

D

posted by DamonLeigh on December 27, 2005 at 6:09 AM | link to this | reply

If Israel required help to survive,

I'd be more than willing to give it to them. That is, supply the funds and the weapons and the intel, but keep our guys out of it.

The Israeli leadership made its people's problems worse by militarily conquering areas beyond the country's legal borders and setting up/expanding permanent settlements. That has made it impossible for moderate Palestinians to believe that Israel has a real desire for peace.

Each side's actions has given credibility to the extremists' belief (on both sides) that one or the other must be "wiped off the map."

posted by Dylan24 on December 21, 2005 at 11:30 AM | link to this | reply

You may be right there, DV

If Israel attacks Iran's nuke facilities, a prudent act of pre-empting religious fanatics with suicidal tendencies, Israel may well be on its own in the aftermath. But I think Israel can hold off Iran's retaliations, short of an all-out war. That is, if Iran retaliates alone.

But I fear Iran will be joined by various other Muslim countries hostile to Israel (are there any that are not hostile?), just as they have joined into a pack of wolves several times before, to attempt to "wipe Israel off the map". Then Israel may require help to survive.

posted by GoldenMean on December 21, 2005 at 5:09 AM | link to this | reply

I think if Israel attacks Iran, Israel will be on its own...

What this article does not account for is that there is a mid-term election in the U.S. next November.

The leader of the party seeking to maintain its majority -- George Bush -- has an approval rating around 40 percent, largely because of the war.

In order to maintain a majority, the Republican leadership is going to have to allay people's fears of another war. If people think a war with Iran is in the GOP's plans -- with a draft to follow -- they will likely turn Congress over to the center-right party, the Democrats.

The U.S. has two parties, one representing the right, the other representing the far-right. (Of course, there is no left.) People are beginning to realize the perils of relying entirely on the far-right. (Now if only they would realize the perils of banishing the left from the political discourse.)

The real challenge is that the GOP has "gerrymandered" its way to secure control of both houses of Congress. Even with an unpopular president and leadership, the GOP will be nearly impossible to defeat next year. The only thing that could enable the Democrats to overcome that disadvantage would be the prospect of another war and a draft.

posted by Dylan24 on December 18, 2005 at 9:46 AM | link to this | reply

DamonLeigh, "Imagine!"

posted by kingmi on December 17, 2005 at 9:59 AM | link to this | reply