awesome possum Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 Just for the sake of argument/discussion, I would really love to see how this would be playing out differently had the US not invaded Iraq.Well, the argument could be made that Ahmadinejad would have lost the 2005 election without the U.S. next door as a bogeyman for him to harp on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awesome possum Posted July 5, 2009 Share Posted July 5, 2009 It's not over yet! Leading clerics defy AyatollahThe most important group of religious leaders in Iran called the disputed presidential election and the new government illegitimate on Saturday, an act of defiance against the country’s supreme leader and the most public sign of a major split in the country’s clerical establishment.A statement by the group, the Association of Researchers and Teachers of Qum, represents a significant, if so far symbolic, setback for the government and especially the authority of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose word is supposed to be final. The government has tried to paint the opposition and its top presidential candidate, Mir Hussein Moussavi, as criminals and traitors, a strategy that now becomes more difficult — if not impossible.If only we had eyes inside the country right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 I don't know if this could even be a new thread but it sounds like the US may have given Israel the green light to strike Iran. I feel like this should be a huge story so maybe I'm overlooking something.If this really new though? In the same article Obama and the US joint chiefs are saying they think it wouldn't be a good idea but if Israel is going to do it, the USA isn't going to stand in their way (whilst if Israel said it was going to, for example, nuke Tehran for some reason the USA probably would stand in their way). Obama also says in the same article that he wants to have reached some conclusion with Iran by the end of 2009. I would be interpreting that as a green light for Israel to attack Iran at the start of 2010 much more readily than these comments by Biden.Israel attacking now would be a humongous disaster. If the situation in Iran can be turned around (less likely now than a week ago, but still not impossible) and a more Western-friendly government installed by the people, a new diplomatic initiative can be attempted. Israel attacking now would likely unite the entire country under the Ayatollah against the West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbigski Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Bush has been the best friend any America-hating Islamic fundamentalist ever had.Except, perhaps, for the dead ones and those chilling in Cuba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord O' Bones Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 Wert - That's kinda what I meant when I said I must be overlooking something. What I may have overlooked is that this is not any real new policy.I think what you overlooked is that you're reading Fox News. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted July 6, 2009 Share Posted July 6, 2009 I think you have also overlooked this:Biden was asked in the interview that if the Israelis decide they need to try to take out Iran's nuclear program, would the U.S. stand in the way militarily?That word being key. It doesn't suggest, so far as I can see, that the US would not diplomatically resist such a move or would necessarily veto a UNSC resolution condemning it, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.