Phydeaux
Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
The Iranian Govt has long supported making the entire Middle Eastern region a nuclear weapons free zone. So do almost all the other governments in the region. It seems like an obvious solution doesn't it?
What is stopping this solution being implemented? There's one nuclear armed country in the region, which just happens to be the same country that is leading the chorus of warmongers against Iran, that refuses to sign the NPT, and won't countenance this solution.
Just as this country prefers conquering the West Bank to peace with the Palestinians, it prefers to take the region to the brink of war, and possibly further, rather than implement a fair solution to the nuclear question.
Saying you're all in favor of a nuclear free zone and then developing nuclear weapons is like fucking for birth control.
It is difficult for me to understand why you loathe peace to the extent you do. The belligerence of your posts suggest that, for you, foreign policy is not about cultivating friendly relations with other countries, nor about promoting the US's interests, or even avoiding confrontation and war but an excuse for dropping nukes on whoever it is you hate the most on any given day.
Nor is it any surprise that you advocate putting one of the region's most belligerent leaders Netanyahoo into a position of leadership on the Iran/nuclear weapons issue, even though Netanyahoo's own spooks, Mossad, advise him that the Iranians are not developing nuclear weapons. Is there a better way of guaranteeing that belligerent rhetoric gets translated into belligerent confrontation and war?
The only surprises are your apparent expectation that (1) others share your love of nuclear confrontation; and (2) that we should consider such an extreme irrational and barbaric attitude as a basis for conducting international relations.
While there isn't a lot to like about the US's Middle Eastern policies, one bright spot is that neo-con approaches such as yours have been consigned to the policy trash can. Long may they stay there.
Personal attacks in the absence of facts.
I asked you to enumerate what "peace bounty would become available following resolution of the Iran-US standoff".
No reply.
I asked you what you thought our strategice interests in Iran were, and how they were advanced by peace.
You prognosticated a war. "Do you really want the current US-Iran impasse to continue indefinitely? The situation could very easily spiral out of control and result in a full scale war throughout the region."
I asked you a war between whom? No answer.
You made the fundamental assertion that diplomacy is always better than war, AND the assertion that I think that war is superior to diplomacy. Neither of which is true.
If you understood the quote, "war is diplomacy by other methods" you would understand that.
Any characterization that I loathe peace is ridiculous. Nor however do I crave peace if that peace results to the detriment of the US and its allies.
For example - this entire middle east quagmire could have been much improved if when israel had conquered and displaced the residents. Their humane decision to allow people to remain gathered no credit and only perpetuated the problem.
Finally, do you have any cites that Mossad has advised that Iran is not building a nukes? Somehow I think if the civilized world knew it there would be no need for sanctions. So, I'll need a cite please because otherwise your unsubstantiated opinion seems rather ridiculous.
|
RE: Iran - 
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