Comments on: Dubya to attack Iran?

By: Bob

Bob — Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:00:39 +0000

Well, heck yes, let’s continue the policy of the US invading wherever it wants. It worked so well in Korea and Vietnam, didn’t it?

Iraq and Afghanistan already ARE quagmires, and that’s hardly the fault of the Left.

By: Sisyphus

Sisyphus — Sat, 31 Dec 2005 15:13:26 +0000

Iran’s President Ahmadinejad: “We are in the process of an historical war between the World of Arrogance [i.e. the West] and the Islamic world, and this war has been going on for hundreds of years. …

The issue of this [World without Zionism] conference is very valuable. In this very grave war, many people are trying to scatter grains of desperation and hopelessness regarding the struggle between the Islamic world and the front of the infidels …

Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism? But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved…”

This, my friends, is what I would term a de facto declaration of war by a provably totalitarian and fascist nutcase.

And, just for fun, let’s go back and count the recent mistakes of the Left in matters of national security, shall we?

* Afghanistan would become a quagmire.
* Iraq would become a quagmire.
* Elections would never take hold in the Middle East.
* There was no illicit Pyongyang/Tehran/Islamabad nuclear parts network.
* Libya would never turn in its WMD program without a shot being fired.
* Syria would never get out of Lebanon.

I’ll be kind and not even mention the failures of the Left with respect to Communism, Welfare (say, the results of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act), or the Clinton era of treating terrorism as a law-enforcement problem.

If — and I hope it never has to come to this — the decision is made to take out Iran’s nuclear program, the “Irani army” referenced above will be introduced to what can only be called “the major leagues of violence.”

By: Eli Stephens

Eli Stephens — Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:38:37 +0000

P.S. - AmericaBlog has done some good work. But there isn’t any question in my mind, based on reading it from time to time, that the author (John Aravosis) is a right-wing Democrat and not any kind of progressive.

By: Eli Stephens

Eli Stephens — Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:37:27 +0000

The use of the word “frivolous” to describe U.S. wars such as the potential strike against Iran, the invasion of Iraq, and surely he must also mean things like the invasions of Grenada, Panama, the Dominican Republic and others, must come as quite a shock to the families of the dead, both foreign and American. I doubt they have thought ANY American war was “frivolous.” Illegal, yes. Immoral, yes. Unjustified and unjustifiable, yes. But “frivolous”? Sorry, no.

Iran has the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to defend itself from VERY REAL foreign enemies (the U.S. and Israel to name the two most prominent) any way it chooses. They say they have no intention to make nuclear weapons, and that’s fine by me, but if they decide that’s what’s necessary to defend themselves against nuclear-armed America and nuclear-armed Israel, that is most definitely NOT grounds to be attacked.