The decision by these mostly moderate Arab states to pursue nuclear technology was predictable. It is not so much preparation for attacking Israel as a reaction to the seemingly inevitable Iranian nuclear program. The Gulf states are historic enemies of Iran and have running disputes over islands in the Gulf, westernization, religion, etc. They would like nothing better than to see the Iranian regime overthrown, but have felt the need to stay low key to preserve their tenuous stalemate. Now they face the specter of a nuclear-armed Iran, which in their eyes calls into question the worth of US security guarantees. They can see a plausible scenario in which Iran invades or blockades them and threatens to go nuclear if the US gets involved. Would a Presdient Hillary be willing to get us in a nuclear war to protect the UAE? The surest way for the US to stop this latest proliferation is to stop the Iranian program and achieve regime change in Iran. Of course, this entire announcement could just be a ploy to add urgency to that goal. In the middle east, one can never be totally sure.
As a moderator, aren't you supposed to ease the battle here, instead of taking sides? I have read thousands of posts on this board and I have never seen such an emotional comment by a moderator:eek:
I watch for spam. I watch for conduct rule violations. I do not edit the content of posts. Perhaps you should focus on what YOU do... So back to my question, did I get that right from the article posted? Michael B.
If the democrats gain control, will that not make it very unlikely that the US will attack Iran anytime soon?Lots of UN baloney and talk of sanctions but they will not let Bush attack.
Iran's real short-term goal... Is to gain military control over the Straits of Hormuz with CONVENTIONAL forces... And turn the world oil supply on/off at will. Americans citizens will NEVER tolerate 100-200% increase in gasoline and heating oil... Thus... the Republican or Democrat response would be identical. Saddam never threatened the oil flow in 2003... That's why the 2nd Iraq war was so controversial... And shocking to Saddam... he just wanted to do business with America. You threaten oil flow... and US doctrine is crystal clear... WAR. He is a scholarly paper on the Iran military option... In summary... By shutting down the Strait to IRANIAN oil... And taking out a few hundred targets... A fairly easy military exercise... Perhaps 10-20% of the scale of the Iraq Wars... The Iranian economy would grind to a halt... And the mullahs would likely lose their grip on power. http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article.asp?aid=12204030_1
Go read "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" by Paul Kennedy. You are right on about their patience. Hell, they came very close to taking over all of Europe. The had one of the most advanced civilizations....ever. They excelled in mathematics, astronomy, had a huge navy. Pretty amazing. But I think you need to differentiate between the really radical wing of Islam and the more mainstream. This may not be as sinister as it's first presented. For instance, Saudi Arabia and Iran are bitter rivals. I don't think these countries are pursuing these programs because they want to launch a nuclear war, they see it as a necessity in combating an overlly aggresive Iran.
I think that's a very big leap of faith. If a moonbat gets into the Oval Office, besides from pulling out of Iraq in a heartbeat, he/she would emasculate the military and try a pacifist foreign policy based on Kumbaya diplomacy. They may very well just accept these jumps in prices as the tax to be paid for the US being the cause of all evil around the world, and instead announce yet more initiatives in alternative forms of energy. I have utterly no confidence in this current crop of Democrats being willing to swing the big stick.
The US does not import oil from Iran. The US imports 60% of the total of oil used, mostly from Canada. Percent of imported oil: From arab countries Saudi Arabia 12%, Iraq 5%, Kuwait 2% The US imported ZERO amount of oil from Iraq from 1991-1996. Iraqi oil is not necessary. Canada 18%, Mexico 15%, Columbia 3%, Ecuador 3%, Venenzuala 10%, Norway 1%, UK 2%, Algeria 3%, Nigeria 12%, Angola 6%, Equatorial Guinea 1% While the countries on the map above supply the greatest proportion of US crude and products imports, in January to March 2006, the US also imported crude oil and/or refined products from Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, China (both mainland and Taiwan), Congo (Brazzaville), Costa Rica, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Libya, Lithuania, Malaysia, Midway Islands, Netherlands, Netherlands Antilles, Oman, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Senegal, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Viet Nam, and Yemen Info above is from: http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html Since the war is ALL about the OIL, why doesn't the US invade Canada, Mexico, Venenzuala and all these other countries?
Actually... Hillary is the Dem frontrunner... And I have read a lot of reports... that she is much tougher than Bill... And of ALL the current candidates for President... Hillary is most likely to wield a Big Military Stick. She has been carefully constructing a right-of-center record on defense in the Senate. Other than his botched invasion of Iraq... GWB has been a total f*cking pansy... With absolutely no creativity or adaptibility in his thinking. Either behave like an Imperial Superpower and kick ass... Or stay home. Iraq should have been partitioned in 2003... With the US setting up shop in friendly Kurdistan... to focus on Iran... And let the Shia and Sunni have their civil war.