tweakabelle
Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
Pretty much. The denials are a lot like reruns, too. Wouldn't it be nice if we could still secretly, and deniably, use technology to keep them stumbling, or maybe found ways to support the Iranian people's version of the Arab Spring?
Sorry, Neda. You died for nothing.
I'm glad you are in favour of democracy in the Middle East. I am too. I'd love to see operating in all the Arab countries and Iran too. That would mean "Arab Springs" in places like Palestine, Bahrain, Jordan and Saudi Arabia as well as the Syrias and Irans. And the West would have to learn to live with outcomes such as those in Libya and Egypt, where the locals decline to follow Western scripts and elected (Shock! Horror!) democratic Islamists to represent them, results that Sanity finds so objectionable.
I am wary of the Muslim Brotherhood. I don't deny that. I think we need to keep watch over that area even more now. I'm not disputing their election wins, but I am disappointed by the results (much like I'm disappointed and wary over Putin's election in Russia).
quote:
Or is democracy only advocated for oil-rich countries? Is 'regime change' code for installing lackeys who will keep the oil flowing and make no problems for the West while they pocket the proceeds?
That has been the general plan execution in the past. It's wrong, I know. And, it's a huge reason why I was against our entry into the Libyan "Arab Spring." It isn't our place to decide who runs those countries. It's the place of the citizens of those countries.
I'm glad we've finally found something we can agree upon. I share your reservations about the MB, or any religion based political movement but to be perfectly honest, I find US Republicans far scarier and much more likely to create international conflict.
quote:
Absolutely, I support US involvement in that mess. Someone has to keep them from acting on their chest thumps.
Better to separate the two before something stupid happens.
Israel has been playing the "Iranian nuclear threat" for over two decades now, repeatedly warning of an "imminent" Iranian nuke that has failed to materialise to date. Here's a short review of that history. Today over 20 years after the initial warnings, there is still no Iranian nuke. The judgement of all US intelligence agencies and Mossad is that Iran is NOT engaged in building nuclear weapons, nor is it planning to build them.
Why is this card being played so consistently now? Ex-AIPAC staffer MJ Rosenberg is pretty specific:
"That is because the primary fear motivating Netanyahu and Barak is not of Iran. It is that President Obama will be re-elected and will, after November, be significantly more immune to their demands for more Iran sanctions, support for some future Israeli strike against Iran and even for U.S.-back-up should an Israeli strike not be able to finish the job. "
http://mjayrosenberg.com/2012/08/16/what-is-the-point-of-netanyahus-iran-bluff/?utm_source=Mondoweiss+List&utm_campaign=e6f1186702-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email
If you cast your mind back to the 2008 election, that was also the occasion of the murderous Cast Lead onslaught on Gaza. So Israel has a history of using US elections to its advantage.
_____________________________
|
Iran Threatens Israels Destruction - 
Profile
. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread