Paul Vallely: War on Iran has begun. And it is madness - Commentators - Opinion - The IndependentIt was MI6, along with the CIA, which orchestrated the overthrow in 1953 of the popular, democratically elected, secular prime minister Mohammad Mosaddeq. He had brought about major social reforms but had also had the temerity to nationalise the petroleum company which became BP. Through the Sixties and Seventies, Britain backed the Shah of Iran, a man whose regime rested on secret police and torture but who was seen as a plausible counterweight to Soviet influence.
No it's because missiles make very good delivery vehicles for nuclear warheads.Back in the 50s it was for oil...
Paul Vallely: War on Iran has begun. And it is madness - Commentators - Opinion - The Independent
...this time it's a mixture of oil, pressure from powerful pro-Israel lobbies in the US, and Iranian efforts to expand their zone of influence clashing with US designs in that region.
Following the WMD in Iraq fiasco do you still believe this scaremongering?
No WMD were found in Iraq. In light of what certain people said in the build up to the war, calling it a 'fiasco' is an understatement:WMD fiasco? You don't know much more than what the local media reports on, do you?
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."
- Dick Cheney, August 26, 2002
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."
- George W. Bush, September 12, 2002
"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world."
- Ari Fleischer, December 2, 2002
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there."
- Ari Fleischer, January 9, 2003
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
- George W. Bush, January 28, 2003
"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."
- Colin Powell, February 5, 2003
"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."
- George Bush February 8, 2003
"So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think
our judgment has to be clearly not."
- Colin Powell, March 8, 2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
- George Bush, March 18, 2003
"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad."
- Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003
No WMD were found in Iraq.
And what I posted illustrates how the US (and UK for that matter) administration deliberately lied and mislead people regarding the threat from Saddam. How could they have got it so wrong? They were BSing, that's how.The fact of the matter remains that Saddam was a threat to us......and free nations all around the region
The fact that no WMD were found and that the yellowcake procurement claims turned out to be bogus, undermine this:
And what I posted illustrates how the US (and UK for that matter) administration deliberately lied and mislead people regarding the threat from Saddam. How could they have got it so wrong? They were BSing, that's how.
We're seeing the same scaremongering tactics now with respect to Iran. Sad to see people being duped all over again.
Glad to be of service but for the record, Iraqis hated Saddam and they are better off without him. That doesn't change the fact that our governments lied to us about the threat from him when making the case for war. That's where it parallels with the case being made for war against Iran.
It is well worth noting the difference between how Iraqis felt about Saddam and how Iranians feel about their government. The latter enjoys fairly popular support and even those Iranians that hate their government would hate Western interference even more. To the extent that any Western attack would unite the country against us.
If I had it my way we wouldn't invade any nation. We would also cut off all foreign aid and support and back door deals immediately as we have our own problems here. We would issue a stern warning to the world that anyone who means to the US any harm will be met with consequences previously unimaginable. I would then peacefully go about our business and the first nation that dared challenge us we would take it to them with the FULL force of our entire military might and make the act so swift and brutal that nobody would dare question the US and it's threats from that point forward.
^The trouble with that line of thinking is you really need aircraft carriers to project force if your target is on the other side of the world. Very expensive, and something you can't do overnight. You also need people on the ground...you can't win wars just by dropping bombs. That's even more expensive. Recent events (the shoot down over Iran) has also shown that drones aren't a complete solution either.I would then peacefully go about our business and the first nation that dared challenge us we would take it to them with the FULL force of our entire military might and make the act so swift and brutal that nobody would dare question the US and it's threats from that point forward.
Is it too late to nominate Ostrich for President?
^The trouble with that line of thinking is you really need aircraft carriers to project force if your target is on the other side of the world. Very expensive, and something you can't do overnight. You also need people on the ground...you can't win wars just by dropping bombs. That's even more expensive. Recent events (the shoot down over Iran) has also shown that drones aren't a complete solution either.
The worst thing the Iranians are actually doing is their influence and interference in the affairs of other Middle Eastern countries. It's one of the reasons why the Saudis dislike them. They blame the Iranians for the unrest in Eastern SA and Bahrain during the Arab Spring among other things.
I don't like it, however, it's no worse than the interference by the US, UK, France, China or Russia or that of the Saudis themselves in the region. Ultimately, this clash of interests is one of the main reasons for this conflict.
Foreign policy has nothing to with childish notions of good vs evil or protecting the fair and the free. It's every major player trying to secure and increase their power and wealth. The righteous rhetoric serves to get the electorate eager and on board. Once we understand this, we can begin to understand global current affairs.
The pursuit of power and wealth underpinning the foreign policies of most major nations is the simplest and most elegant explanation for conflicts we are witnessing today. When do you ever hear an analysis of this making headlines?I used some more childish notions to prove that sometimes the simplest solution is the best. Problem is the simple solution doesn't line the coffers of the 'consultants' who come up with the complicated and less effective plans. If we were all about wealth why are we so far in debt? You know how easy it would be to conquer the entire world if that was what our plan was? Your 'quest for world domination' theory is entertaining and is just the sort of thing that gets headlines & draws in people who can't think for themselves but it's not entirely accurate.
Not only the first letter, but the middle two!I realise that with both beginning with the same letter it's confusing, but Iran is the topic; Iraq is off-topic, as is other general geo-political discussion. If it doesn't fit in to this topic, it deserves a separate one of its own.
Thanks!
You could start with reading some of the articles by Robert Fisk about Iran. He has lived in Beirut for over 30 years and there are few Western journalists that come even close to matching his knowledge when it comes to the Middle East.Not only the first letter, but the middle two!
Also, does anyone have some unbiased new on this topic, I am very uninformed (besides tv news >.>).
Not only the first letter, but the middle two!
Also, does anyone have some unbiased new on this topic, I am very uninformed (besides tv news >.>).
We've been tracking upcoming products and ranking the best tech since 2007. Thanks for trusting our opinion: we get rewarded through affiliate links that earn us a commission and we invite you to learn more about us.