--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "peterklutz" <peterklutz@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "Robert Gimbel" <babajii_99@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "peterklutz" <peterklutz@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In case you missed it - Iran has been "taking it out" on the US and > > > > the world since 1979. > > > > > > > > The situation today is that the US and the World is damned if they > > > > attack Iran and damned if they don't. > > > > > > > > Let's just hope that whatever happens, it is the lesser of the evils > > > > at hand. > > > > > > > > > > > There is a lot of dissent in Iraq, right now, particularly with the > > > younger people there, and woman's rights and all of that. > > > It seems that a greater push should be given to support the dissent > > > within the country; in the same way we could have perhaps dealt with > > > Iraq, before we invaded it. > > > > What makes you think that the Bush-administration in a few months in > > the spring of 2007 will excel in a type of military operation the US > > has failed in since the Vietnam war? > > > > The DNA strain required to understand counterinsurgency is apparently > > not part of the American gene pool. > > > > > Bombing Iran, would be the worse solution, according to many analysts; > > > And would only feed the hatred, and the apocalyptic visions of many > > > of the radicals; and would inflame Islam world-wide. > > > > What today counts is not the presence of intent (the hatred can't be > > any stronger than it already is), but the growing capabilities and > > aboundant opportunities of Radical Islam (led by Iran) to hurt the > > rest of the World. > > > > Take Iran out of the picture and three immediate accomplishments are > > reached: (1) the so-called palestinian question ceases to be an issue; > > (2) lebanon becomes a sovereign state; (3) the world's flow of oil out > > of the Persian Gulf is secured. > > > > Failing an MMY solution to this challenge, logic suggest that a world > > leader caught up in this malstroem of Evil, and which choses to do > > something about it, should play on it's strengths when dealing with > > this regime. > > > > In short, nuke Shiite Iran back to neolithicum. > > > > And the Iraqi Shi'ites will appreciate this because...? >
Sparaig: Your one-liner does not make sense as a reply to my posting. Feel free to backup four paras; read (and understand) the point about intent - and try again. For other readers, here's an update on the level and quality of the "apocalypticness" of Iran's current regime: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/08/opinion/edstern.php
