Washington File

[Part V response top Potter Et al.]

Ronald Potter: "Canadian PM Sir Robert Borden said to Lloyd George in 1919: "...It is the destiny, duty and responsibility of the english-speaknig Western nations to defend and promote freedom and democracy around the world...".

The world is a bad place with bad people. We of the democratic West are obligated to deal with them; aggressively for sure, pre-emptively if necessary."

I don't buy this false patriotism. In this context, "Freedom and democracy" are just words used as spin to justify the strategic objectives of one power that has no interest in either of those two ideals. The leaders behind this doctrine are allergic to not just freedom and democracy, but even to facts and reality. Don't call up some mythical solidarity between English-speaking nations as an excuse for when one of those countries wants to decide the course of the world unilaterally, or when it won't admit the self-destructive nature of its geo-political intrigues and back down from them. Where's that solidarity when it comes time to listen to what the other members of circle say, and take their advice seriously? Nowhere to be found. If real freedom and democracy were at issue, there would be no controversy, but the fact that the Iraq war and the planned Iran war have nothing to do with defending either one makes your misuse of the quote sickening.

The Canadian troops currently fighting in Afghanistan signed up to fight for Canada's freedom, sovereignty, and national interests, not some phony concept where "democracy" means following every deranged scheme another power comes up with. Sorry, Ronald, but we real *Canadian* patriots know the difference between right and wrong, and direct our patriotism towards our own nation and no other.

[Part IV response Potter et al.]
This time around, you all shout "Iran is dangerous and must be stopped", and as always not a single consideration is made to the real situation. Never mind that inside Iran, Ahmedinajad gets a boost (and moderates lose out) every time Bush runs his mouth about attacking Iran - we're supposed to believe this kind of blowhard attitude is supposed to be helpful. Never mind that if Iran lauched a nuke at any other country (let alone the US or Israel who have nukes), the nuclear retaliation would wipe them out - we are told to believe that Iran wants nukes, solely for the purpose making an unprovoked (and strategically suicidal) strike at some vaguely "western" target, with no regard to the consequences. Never mind that since Bush came to power, the US has torn up the space weapons / ABM treaties, and bio-weapons treaty - we must of course believe Iran is the outlaw of the world. And last but not least, let's not forget there last time the US lauched a war against somebody, every reason they gave for doing it (WMD's, the Al Qaida-Saddam connection, spreading democracy) turned out to be a steaming load of bulls**t - but of course we're supposed they are telling the truth *this time*.

And as usual, every time they need a new war against their old friends, there's always a portion of the public who are suckers, who have no memory, no grasp of history, and not a clue about strategic affairs - just blow the bugle and they charge.

[Part III - reponse to Potter et al.]
This same notion is what prevents them from making any kind of peace with Shiites in Iraq today - the idea that Iraq's shiites must not be in power not because of any issues of their own, but because they believe big bad Iran would contol them. They invaded saying they would "bring democracy to Iraq", then reject what the Iraqi's actually chose because it's "just too Shiite" for their liking. They assert their own right to control what Iraqi's do, what govern they live under, and even tolerate Saudis and Egyptians funding Sunni terror groups there, but somehow if Iran even looks to have some influecne there, it's "evil" and "forbidden". Then they wonder publicly why, whether Sunni or Shiites, Iraqis seem to universally hate their guts. (Maybe they don't want to be contolled or manipulated by anybody? Wow, there's a shocking idea!)

The US grouses and complain about Iran's supposedly upcoming WMD threat, but the fact that Israel already has many nukes already, is not even talked about, except in the context of "righteously and preemptively" nuking Iran. Pakistan has nukes and has never fully forsaken the Taliban, and if terrorists were to get ahold of an a-bomb, the most likely source is there - yet the US doesn't spend it's time making threats against Pakistan, despite the fact that what remains of the Taliban and Al Qaida is based there now.

[Part II, reponse to R. Potter]

Ronald Potter: "Yes Hussein was a Western ally in the 1980's against Khomeni's radicals. So was bin Laden's fighters against the Soviets, so was Noriega against the drug cartels and the best one of all, Stalin was our best friend when we fought against Hitler. But once WW2 was over, Stalin became the enemy (and rightfully so). There is no fine line in world affairs & history, it is all gray matter."

Oh, so now you try to feed people this "good versus evil" line about "defending the west" and "fighting terror", but then explain away all the times the US has installed, supported, and defended despots with some throwaway line about it being a "grey world"? Come off it! Every time they cozy up to some dictator or terrorist group, it ends up badly for both the countries they tamper with and the countries of "the west". Yet somehow it's always the fault of someone other than them, not the natural result of their meddling with other countries to control what those countires do. You can't have it both ways and play the good/evil game until it becomes inconvenient and then pretend it's all grey "moral relativism" out there.

The US acted like pals with the Taliban until 9-11 happened, trying to make pipeline deals with them, because they were happy to see deranged Sunni puritans allied to Pakistan controlling Afghanistan, rather than the Northern Alliance, which seemed too friendly towards Iran. They backed Saddam, saved his regime on several occaisions, and then only became a "bad seed" to them because he gassed his own people in addition to Iran's troops and turned against his creditors in Kuwait and Saudia Arabia. So after that one war (the one he totally deserved) did they remove him at that time? Nope - and because if he had fallen, they felt any new government would have been too friendly with Shiite Iran.

A response, particluarly to Ronald Potter, but generally to some others also:

Ronald Potter: "Nobody lied about WMD evidence. The UN, UN inspectors, IAEA, British, French, German, Russian and US intelligence all said that Hussein had WMD's."

No, they did not. The US and UK manufactured a fake case, to justify invading. They suppressed the real evidence that Iraq had no WMD's, ruined the careers of their of intelligrence agents and weapons scientists who had dared to point out the truth of it. And the same punishment was handed out to those who pointed out that there was no connection between Saddam and Al Qaida / 9-11. It was 100% fake, but anyone within their own governments who didn't go along with the lie payed dearly for it (Valerie Plame, Richard Clarke, and that UK weapons expert scientist who exposed faults in Blair's intel and then was a 'suicide', are all examples of this).

The others you list all stated there was no credible evidence of Iraqi WMD's, right up to the invasion and even afterwards. Don't make up some revisionist garbage that they elieved the WMD fairy tales, because the fact is they did not, and stated it clearly. That is why the UN never sanctioned any invasion, because they knew the case for invasion had no truth to it, and any such war would have been illegal. Not that the US didn't denounce the UN and all the countries that did not go along with their plan, even those who went to Afghanistan (where the real terrorist threat was based) were treated like garbage by Bush administration people who thought that 9-11 meant the world should just shut up and do as its told.

[End of part I]

Well if this e-mail manages to get posted, I have, as you requested Darius, provided the real evidence and where it is documented. However the CBC has somehow not posted my reply. How surprising. A realist, now labelled an extremist, is not allowed to defend his posts or provide REAL evidence to back up what I write. The REAL CBC has shown it's colours.

Do any of you contributors on both sides even see your own ignorance and rigidity?

To the CBC, is there anyone sane with moderate views contributing or do you have no choice but to publish armchair extremists' diatribes???

Chris from london,
can you please enlighten on us on the REAL danger Iran poses. Please give me REAL evidence of how Iran is supporting the insurgetns and how it is a danger to the world? how its pursuing nuclear weapons? Since you are REAL you can provide real evidence? I can provide you with real evidence of how the US is a threat to other countries 1) threating to attack Iran, Has attacked Iraq, Has attacked Libya, Has attacked Afghanistan, has help create and finance terrorists, Al-qaeda, Has bombed dried milk factories in the Sudan. These are real evidence, can we see your REAL evidence?

The BBC,NPR,AlJazzera,CBC? I know it could'nt possibly be the evil Fox News. Everbody knows where to find the real truth if they want to. It's not from spin doctors or rewritten history books. Everything is well documented in public records.
Secondly, there won't be any stand taken against Iran or China or N.Korea. Everybody is too busy trying to figure it out the nice way. When we do nothing and somebody is attacked, or worse, wiped out, watch all the same people who say the U.S. is making everything up. They will instantly turn and say the U.S. had the knowledge and the power to do something and they chose to do nothing. Funny.
Now I see the comment stating the U.S. has killed more Muslims than Muslims have killed Americans. What a ridiculous statement. I don't suppose it would have anything to do with technology and war would it? What were they supposed to do? Leave the jets and tanks at home and run across the desert to make it FAIR? Shame on those American's for wanting to win. Shame on them for being smarter,faster,more advanced.
Also forget about the hogwash that the U.S. is the only country to say Iraq had WMD's. Never mind listening to your favourite peace-nic program for your info. It's well documented that many other countries had intelligence supporting the fact as well as voting for the 14 resolutions at the U.N. to deal with Iraq. So those of you who choose to leave that part out forget it. After all it's even on the books at all knowing U.N. Your hero's.
I don't suppose there were any picture's of Saddam and Madeline Albright, or any with Jimmy Carter were there? Besides you can't have it both ways. For all the talk about American aggression, they are now guilty of a photo while in peace talks or a time of peace? While working on world issues together. If you think Iran is not a threat,does'nt support terrorism, and wants nuclear energy to run the washer and dryer, your not being real.

With all this narrow view of Iran and Iraq, I would like to propose that no solution for stability is possible in this region without the full and unconditional support of Russia and all of Europe among others.

We can talk black and white about the US and its policies but without the aforementioned, Iran will continue to play the ends against the middle.

Oh and the bargaining chip? Oil delivery that runs right through Iran. Is Europe about to cut itself off? I dont think so.

Until the world decides enough is enough (and that includes the majority of countries that are muslim or muslim influenced including Iraq), Europe, regional countries and the United States take a hard stand and are prepared to back it up by whatever means necessary including military, the status quo will remain. That means the whole world has to take a stand, not just a few aligned countries.

Simply put, Iran are master manipulators and they are expert at it; better even than the US. We are simply playing their game.

I just like to respond to Ronald (Pot?) Potter. He was responding to "anti-US and blatantly stupid people". This is the problem with so many Americans, some Canadians and many Europeans. They simply can not interact with others, specially middle easterners, without insulting them and saying something insulting and being disrespectfull toward them.(And these are the same English speaking people from western countries who want to bring democracy to other countries.)
1) Mr Potter could not and did not refute anything that I had said. Thus proving my point.
2)None of what Mr Potter has said he or others can prove. It is simply non sense, i.e. Khomeni's radicals. What do you mean by radical and how did you know that they are radicals. I will challenge you to prove anything you have said.
3)As far as your old ally Saddam is concern. Please note he killed one million Iranians and millions of Iraqis. Some ally and friend.
4)Mr Potter has said that there is gray in world history and affairs. But in an intersting way he considers Iranians to be bad and dangerous people and there should be a war against them. MMMMMM seems very black and white and what happened to the gray stuff. And would you, Mr (Pot?) Potter consider 9/11 and what happened to jews and others in the hands of Nazis as gray. Or what happened in Abu Gharib prison to be gray.

Yes Don, I do think that Iran "poses a threat."

Iran sponsors terrorists... ANYWHERE! Iran could supply and support a terrorist group right here in my Canada. I just might be walking by when the bomb goes off! And if it isn't me who gets it, it'll be someone else. Unacceptable!

Also, some of my fellow Canadians, the most selfless of us all, are currently risking their lives in Afganistan where Iran is, right at this very minute, helping those who wish to kill my fellow, most selfless Canadians.! Again, totally unacceptable!

Obviously, I am much, much more concerned for the safety of Canadians in Afganistan than I am for mine (or anyone else's in Canada). The threat posed, nonetheless, exists everywhere! That's the point! Terrorism ain't much good if everyone knows where the next attack will be!

P.S. to "Yours In Disgust:" I don't think it's "amusing," though I do sometimes fall into the "Ya just gotta shake yer head" mind-set as a natural defence to the outright evil ridiculousness of a problem so easily solved, and yet so long-lasting. Also, I've always felt that it is fairer to criticize people who have given ther names and who openly hold themselves up to scrutiny if you give your name too. Fair is fair, don't you think?

To Jeff Wilson; You're a day late and a dollar short, as the old saw has it: I did indeed mention Israel in my post where I also suggest that Iran is no more than a regional nuisance lacking the werewithal to do anyone any serious harm, particularly when Israel has it's airforce ready to go and a US carrier force is sitting just off shore. Both Israel and the US have the combined might -nuclear and conventional - to reduce Iran to dust in a heart beat so, again, why worry? What is the rush, what is the fuss, and what is the muss? Iran is just a whipping post for the American regime to demonstrate their ownership of the region to the Chinese and the Russians, nothing more and nothing less. You don't seriously think Iran actually poses a threat to anyone do you? C'mon, you're all smarter than that aren't you?

How fortunate for Jeff Wilson that he is able to find such shameless amusement in all the death and suffering of this world.

I was intrigued by the second commentator,Mr.Ronald Potter.His glance through history was just that,a glance.One can form the same limited view of history by reading information on the internet only or any neo con publication.
The world does not understand the freedom loving,democracy delivering U.S.A. and the "West",as a whole. Poor America;misunderstood,hated in some regions and never recognized for its tireless passion to free the world.Neo con soap opera script since 1950. Remember one thing Mr.Potter;respect is a privilege one earns. If you have to beg people to like and respect you,it means you've done nothing to deserve it.
In a parlance neo cons worship,you can take that to the bank.

Ronald is wrong about WMD. Nobody but the Americans said there were WMD in Iraq but the Americans. Everybody knew they were lying. They made up the evidence that Colin Powell presented to the UN. Now they claim that everybody else was also wrong so it was an honest mistake.

I find it interesting how B2 talks about "eliminating EVERYTHING". I guess that is a euphemism for genocide. I find it amazing that everybody isn't repulsed by that kind of talk. I wonder how sickened people would be if someone used that kind of language in reference to Jews.

I hate to comment so soon after my last comment. But there have already been 20 comments so far (at the time of this writing), and no-one has mentioned Israel! What gives!?

Come on, people! We are talking about the Middle East, for God's sake (pun intended!).

OK, I'll go first:

Israel will solve the world's problem (perceived or real) of a nuclear Iran by utterly destroying Iran's nuclear capability.

How? With the best trained air force in the world.

When? When Israel is good and ready (sooner than later, I reckon).

Why? Because they can. And because the Iranian government has threatened Israel with annihilation. And so they feel that they have no choice.

And then what? More of the same... it's the Middle East, for heaven's sake!

MEMO to 'cbc reader' and the rest of the historically ignorant, anti-US and blatantly stupid people:

1) Nobody lied about WMD evidence. The UN, UN inspectors, IAEA, British, French, German, Russian and US intelligence all said that Hussein had WMD's. The only difference was that France, Germany and Russia wanted to get cheap oil from Saddam regardless of how many of his own people he murdered. They only cared about the almighty dollar (note: only about 10% of US oil consumption is supplied by the Mid-East.

2) Yes Hussein was a Western ally in the 1980's against Khomeni's radicals. So was bin Laden's fighters against the Soviets, so was Noriega against the drug cartels and the best one of all, Stalin was our best friend when we fought against Hitler. But once WW2 was over, Stalin became the enemy (and rightfully so). There is no fine line in world affairs & history, it is all gray matter.

3) People think that radical Muslims are nuts? Catholics & Protestants in N. Ireland, every ethnic group in the former Yugoslavia etc etc - all based on religion.

Canadian PM Sir Robert Borden said to Lloyd George in 1919: "...It is the destiny, duty and responsibility of the english-speaknig Western nations to defend and promote freedom and democracy around the world...".

Like it or not, this is a fact.

Iran is dangerous and must be stopped; and so should North Korea. Their supporters/suppliers, mainly Russia & China must be held accountable.
Chavez is another nut, "Fatherland & socialism or death"-words spoken this week in Venezuela, just like Hitler !

The world is a bad place with bad people. We of the democratic West are obligated to deal with them; aggressively for sure, pre-emptively if necessary.

Besides the fact this whole scenario is disgusting, nothing will matter in Iraq until the 150,000 U.S. troops begin to do what they are there to do, wage war. This war has been fought with flowers. If you declare war it must be all or nothing.
Again like Vietnam, it will be the falicy of judgement that will defeat the "armies of freedom" and the U.S. will be left to swallow a terrible pill. This time though, the stakes are far higher.
U.S. commanders must take control of this battle and begin the task of eliminating EVERYTHING if there is any chance of victory. What does this mean? Ask the Shia militants who kill indiscriminantly. Women, men, children. Old, young, weak or strong. The strength of the Shia militias is that they will destroy anyone they feel is in their way, innocent or not.
While options now are far from perfect, these troops are on the ground, and the firepower is there. Even though people on this planet will not like it for a second, most are not fond of how Shia militants are carrying out their battle plans either.
What is clear is who has the upper hand at the moment. It's time for this to get ugly or the U.S. may as well pack up tomorrow.

Here is a simple question: Have Americans killed more muslims or muslims killed Americans in the last four to five years. The answer is obvious (In case you are wondering Americans have killed far more muslims than muslims have killed Americans). The second question: who was exposed to have lied about Iraq and its WMD. Again the answer is obvious. The third question: Who supported Saddam when he was killing Iraqi and Iranians. The answer is obvious again. So the argument that Iran now is considered a problem is rather bizzare. I have seen pictures of Saddam with Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George Bush SR. So the question is: what went wrong with Saddam's love affair with Americans and others. These are the questions that have to be asked rather than the bizzare unproven stuff about how Iran is supporting "Insurgents" and "Jihadists".

Hey Chris! Your comment has inspired me to go a bit tongue and cheek too! I'm gonna go conspiracy buff, big-time!

Here we go:

It's all China's fault! They gave (indirectly) Iran nuke-capability, they don't want the USA anywhere in Asia, and they want the USA to be humiliated as much, and as many times, and in as many places as possible (especially in Asia)!

So why not support and supply Iran to stir it up in Iraq and Afganistan, which are Iran's neighbors, and where there are American troops, and where a withdrawl of these troops will not only mean humiliation for the USA, but also... a vacume!?

I'm sure the Chinese would love to fill the vacuum with cheap consumer products and arms, in return for oil!

But, (and it's a real big but!) no power that ever supported and supplied a force of havoc was ever able to control this force after it had won! NEVER! Case in point: The USA used to support and supply Al-Qaeda. Remember?

And so my conspiracy comes full circle when the forces of havoc now supported by China - through Iran - turn their havoc upon China because of China's horrendous treatment of muslims in China. And because they can. They will be strong enough because of all the weapons and training they recieved... from China!

Ok, everyone... criticize the living heck out of me! Or, better yet, come up with an even better conspiracy! the times are right!

Oh no ChaimOlam, now your gonna get it. Don't you know you cannot say anything negative about the innocent countries in the Middleast that are only trapped in a defense mode against American imperialism? You are not allowed to state facts. You can only blame the U.S. for evey problem known to mankind, for they are the pure definition of evil.
Ed I don't think you will escape the anti-U.S. wrath either.
We should just sit back and wait until the highly credible U.N. comes up with about 14 resolutions on how to contain "local issues".
I know, let's get the Golden Boy, Bill Clinton. I'm sure he can solve everything by doing nothing. Jimmy Carter can help too. We can send him around to all the countries in the world to confuse them with policy changes he has no control over.
I'm glad Iran is not an enemy. All that stuff about nuclear weapons and terrorism is just drummed up so that we hate them. I sure feel better knowing that Iran does'nt support terrorism. It must be a great place to live. I wonder why people are'nt moving there in droves. To have such good leadership in a country. Wow! It's hard to imagine why. I mean, with us living so close to the enemy United States and being that Stephen Harper must be as well. Go figure.
It's terrible the way those soldiers are forced to fight. I always thought in Canada and the United States it was a volunteer army?
I bet we will have huge defects over there. When it's time to come home, the army will want to stay because they are that much closer to that paridise, Iran.
Those troops in Afghanistan, they must have lured them there with visions of paradise like Iran. As soon as they get their chance they'll be gone to the arms of the inviting Osama. I wonder if they know the World Trade Centre was actually attacked by the evil U.S. themselves. How brilliant! They attack themselves so they can steal everyone elses oil.

Dear Darius

The comments are not absurd when you can stand back and think about them for a minute.

Middle Eastern countries generally have an abysmal record when it comes to liberty and expression. But, having visited many places in the middle east I personally conclude that places which have "secular" governments ie. Jordan, Egypt, UAE, Bahrain are better places to live in than those dominated by clerics such as Iran.

To clarify one point made, Iran is supporting Al Qaeda leaders who fled Afhganistan. Not arming but supporting them by giving them sanctuary. Iran is also supporting Hamas and other terrorist groups in the PA terrorities which are "Sunni" with financing and weapons.

As far as watching American TV, I enjoy a good episode of Battlestar Galactica or American Idol, but CNN - the most trusted news station, give me a break. I find there many places to get better informed than that.

Taken all in all, Iran doesn't represent very much of a threat to anyone anywhere. When Iraq tried to develop a nuclear program Israel bombed their facilities and put a stop to them permanently (never mind the vitriol and misinformation circulated later on about their weapons programs, which we all knew was utter hogwash in the extreme). There is nothing to suggest that the same won't happen to Iran if, in fact, their nuclear program represents a threat. It's easy enough to monitor their weapons activities in this day and age; with modern satellites very little can be hidden from sight for very long. The upshot then is that Iran is a local nuisance and not much else. it is paranoia of the first rank to think for a moment that the Shi'ites can "take over the world". To even utter that rubbish in public smacks of the worst sort of demented propaganda from the 50's; and the communists had a better shot at dominating the world than one little religious sect could ever hope for if for no other reason than the communist political philosophy was less extreme.

Iran is an isolated state, virtually powerless when compared to the military power of the west: their potential allies in the region are likewise impotent when it comes to threatening anyone beyond a few hundred miles, so what are you so worried about? Even if they did manage to mount a nuke on a missile and aim it at Israel they would very quickly dissappear beneath several dozen mushroom clouds simultaneously, so relax, they may be vocal but they're not stupid. Regime change is necessary in Iran too, is it? Where is your vaunted democratic ideals when it comes to elections and self determination? That sentiment sounds more fascist than liberal democratic. Have you thought of trying diplomacy over war yet? Maybe you might want to give that a try before starting another endless war with another Muslim country. Isn't one losing front enough for you people?

In repsponse to the post by ChaimOlam in which he says ``Wake up people! Ask any Iranian about the quality of life in the US or Canada compared to life under the Iranian regime. It's a black and white comparison and a no brainer`` no kidding this is a no brainer..lol What about comparing the living conditions and freedom of expression between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt, Pakistan... Your comparison and arguments are absurd, why would you even compare Canada to Iran? you can`t even compare Russia to Canada!!... and why are there people saying Iran is arming SUNNI insurgents...like al-qaeda, this is EXTREMELY FUNNY since Iran has been fighting sunni extremists for ever unlike the US which armed them and created them (please read good muslim bad muslims). Its funny how we all are so proud of our country (CANADA) because everyone is given a fair chance and are not guilty until proven guilty... how come we don`t give this benefit of a doubt to IRAN... oh i forgot because CNN said so!!!! and don`t give me any unproven ``fact`` like they are helping insurgents... education is the key people... stop watching american TV!!!

What would you do if a group of armed thugs were taking control of your neighborhood? you would take steps to protect yourself right,or is this just an American right, American justification for the invasion of Iraq was self defence which in it self appears just but it was the absolute disregard for Iraq people and their right to have a society of their own not a imposed American ideaolgy But as we all know this war was about liberating Iraqi oil not it`s people. Is Iranian oil next because we all know the Iranian people need to be liberated from their oppressive goverment. just remember CHEAP oil is good for american bisness thus is good for the world acording to GW Bush [ya right only if your the one making the BIG profits]

Iraq's is more Iran's business than it is America's. Iran is a neighbour, just like Syria, Jordan, Kuwait, Sauda arabia, and Turkey. What happens in Iraq is a natural concern to the, so Washington threatening them is ridiculus - it is countries like the US and Uk, which treat the region as their own personal gas station who have no business being there. Iran and Syria's involvement is tagged as "dangerous", but we're supposed to believe the clandestine funding of Sunni insurgents by Egyptians and Saudis is acceptable?
It's foolish for an invader like the US to try and set terms over who's allowed to meddle with Iraq and who isn't, when really it's up to Iraq's neighbours to achieve some kind of balance of power there. But there is no hope at all the US will ever understand it's presence in the region is simply not wanted, let alone end it's "new cold war" posture against Iran, which it has maintained since 1979. In any case, their case that Iran can somehow control Iraq through Iraq's Shiites is greatly overestimated. Iran is a primarily Persian country, while Iraq is mainly Arabic, so on ethnic grounds, one group would not tolerate being controlled by the other. Anyone with a real grasp of the region's politics and history would know that. However, the US seems blinded by the own delusions, and are now trying to find some excuse to attack Iran and widen a regional war which they already can't handle.

in your article "what to do in Iraq..." you mentioned the line "nuclear-loving mullahs" I mean, isn't this a racist, idiotic, pathetic, pro-jewish, pro-american, garbage. Don't you white old men have any shame. If you talk about jewish or black leaders this way you would be fired on the spot. But you feel comfortable and proud to describe the Iranian leaders this way.

More and more, the reports show that Iran is taking a larger and direct role in the insurgency in Iraq. Add this to their nuclear ambition, their continued support of terrorists in Lebanon, Gaza and elsewhere shows that, sooner or later, they will have to be stopped.

Call it what you will, regime-change is going to be necessary there too.

Wake up people! Ask any Iranian about the quality of life in the US or Canada compared to life under the Iranian regime. It's a black and white comparison and a no brainer.

The US and the free world has a right to be suspicious of Iranian goals. The Ayatollah Khomeni made a 4 fold plan available for all to read
1. foment instability in various spots in the Middle East by indirect means.
2. Takeover Iraq
3. Destroy Israel and Liberate Jerusalem
4. Shite domination of the world

This is published and can be found on the internet easily.

Of course they have not invaded anyone in 2 centuries. With regime change in 79 they don't have to. They operate mostly covertly although not transparently ie. proxies have been created like Hezbollah, they have financed terror groups like Hamas, Islamic Jihad. They provide support to the leaders of Al Qaida and governments like Syria.

Stop the anti US tirade and for once take a serious look at the world and see Iran for what it is presently.

Well i find all these ``facts`` about iran being an enemy quite interesting... The Iraqis view Iran as a friend, they have maintained their postion that Iran is regarded as an ally. 2) The fact that Iran ``slaughters its opposition`` although i agree that iran is not the most liberal country in the world, you can be sure that it is FAR more liberal then most of the US allies... anybody who says otherwise is ignorant of the facts on the grounds... 3) Iran has not attacked another country in almost two centuries.. but obviously the US has.... 4) There has never been any proof that would indicate iranian arming of the insurgents. 5) there has never been any proof (as per the UN) that the iranian nuclear program is non-peacefull. STOP LISTENING TO THE US government.

I don't buy the rhetoric myself, it's largely a replay of the smoke and mirrors malarkey that was the prelude to the Iraq War.

In my view the chest beating over Iran is largely a way to lighten the load of the current albatross around Bush's neck, Iraq. Iran makes the perfect scapegoat for the whole mess.

A Force of stability since the great war? Once I would have agreed with you however this current regime has spent all that good will and attitude a long time ago and now all that's left is what they are, dangerously irresponsible and a threat to peace everywhere. We all knew this in the run up to the one sided slaughter in Iraq: now they propose to extend the war into Iran. Your own point number 2 is telling as well; substitute the name Iran for United States and you're making the same argument I am about hegemony in the region. The real targets here are Russia and China, of course, more specifically their increasing appetite for oil, so I suppose it's inevitable that the US would attempt to get in there first to control the resource. The conflict between the powers over this region will only continue to grow and fester, as it has done from the very beginning, once it was determined that there was a "broader strategic objective" to be pursued.

A few comments.
1 - America is not the enemy here. Agree or disagree with the current adminstration, bottom line is the US has been a force of stability since their entrance into the Great War WW1. Such labelling and name calling is just sillyness.

2. If Iran gets a foothold in Iraq and succeeds in dominating the country. They will have control of most of the regions vast oil reserves and can and will use it to promote their agenda of domination of the Middle East under the Shite banner.

3. Opposition - look how opposition is crushed in Iran now. Let's say the Sunni's and Kurds oppose the Shia majority and fight back. The Iranian backed government just like under Saddam will simply crush them by overwhelming and brutal force; developing a similiar state police system like the Revolutionary Guard. It is highly doubtful Egypt and the Saudi's will risk open war. They will only beef up their own armies in a defensive posture.

The Mullahs need to be contained if they do not change their ways. If not the alternative will lead to WW3.

"The whole objective, we were told, was to keep the nuclear-loving mullahs of Iran at bay in the region..." Wrong. The "troop surge" was supposedly to "stabilize" Baghdad. The aircraft carriers are intended to intimidate Iran or - worst case scenario -attack Iran. Senators are an opportunistic and corrupt gang of trough-feeders, largely ignorant of other nations and cultures. Calling Lugar "best" American Senator isn't saying much. One thing is correct: they will try to keep a U.S. stranglehold on much of the world's oil reserves, and the region -- and the world -- will pay for their bull-in-a-china-shop bungling.

What should the Americans do as the Iranians move into Iraq? Very simple: move out and let the Iraninans deal with the mess. The US is already stretched precariously thin militarily-wise fighting on numerous fronts. Now, rather than later, would be a good time to drop the steaming, seething mess into the meddling Ayatollah's lap. If Iran wants to convert Iraq into Iran Jr. so much, give it to them gift-wrapped. Let it become its brother's keeper. Iran will not be able to hold onto Iraq any better than the US and it will drain its resources very quickly in trying.

Although I certainly don't support the easy option of cutting and running from the American self-created quagmire, not staying in Iraq (now very long past their welcome date) is a very viable option. Given that the Shias, Sunnis, Kurds and others can't get along and obviously want to have a go at one-another, the best option is to let the country stew in its own juices. This is what they obviously want. If they really didn't want this, there would be no Sunni/Shia civil war.

Once the Iranians move in fully and install their absolute Shia theocracy, then the other countries in the region will have to step up and deal with Iran rather than pay lip service and back-stab the US for doing their dirty work for them. Let them put their money and resources where their mouths are and step up to the plate.

There are several things in this article to worry about, such as the human rights records of states such as "Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordon, the Gulf States and others" virtual dictatorships propped up by the United States: of course they're going to support the US foir heaven's sake! Then we have the "broader strategic objectives" of the US government: just what are those anyway? Control of all the oil in the region? Containment of China, Russia, someone else? Why should we support such a nakedly ambitious and adventurous USA? How are our own "broader strategic objectives" being served by supporting US Imperialism in the world? Is our "war against terror" merely a shadow play so that the US can gain hegemony over the region? Russian president Putin is already deeply concerned over US expansionism in the region and given the fact the "enemy" is on their very doorstep the Iranians have every right to be as well. A hostile, war-mongering, unilateralist state; a proven aggressor having demonstrated their clear and unmistaken contempt for the rule of law on numerous occasions, bristling with weaponry and even threatening nuclear war, masses on the Iranian border while it's propaganda machine drums up hatred and fear at home, and we think of Iran as the enemy! There is only one enemy here in North America and that is the current American regime. We can't even gain their attention on global climate change yet our troops are being slaughtered in Afghanistan to further their "broader strategic objectives." I have only been alive for 49 years yet I can't begin to remember feeling this much contempt for the United States as I do now, not even during the darkest days of the Vietnam war.