Is Iran a threat?

more of a threat is Pakistan who gave AQ nukes when Musharaff stepped out of his military post. so now Iran isn't in such a hurry to supply AQ with the material.
 
Werbung:
Well, they do like to be surprising, that's for sure:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080103/pl_nm/iran_usa_khamenei_dc

Of course, we've learned in the past that overtures of friendship can sometimes mean squat (think Pearl Harbor), and these aren't even overtures of friendship, just the hint that overtures of friendship might be somewhere down the road.

Still, it's something to think about.
 
Extremely interesting to think about!

Well, they do like to be surprising, that's for sure:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080103/pl_nm/iran_usa_khamenei_dc

Of course, we've learned in the past that overtures of friendship can sometimes mean squat (think Pearl Harbor), and these aren't even overtures of friendship, just the hint that overtures of friendship might be somewhere down the road.

Still, it's something to think about.

However, AK's hints about possible relations with the U.S. could be meant to appease a sizeable group of moderates within Iran. I might be crazy, but I have suspected for quite awhile that part of the reason for the invasion of Iraq was so Iran could feel our hot breath down the back of their neck, so to speak, which could raise the possibility of their oppressive regime being toppled from within. And all that talk about Iraq's "WMDs" and possible "nuc-YA-ler" capabilities was just a smokescreen to confuse our potential enemies, as well as to get our own "clueless public" to accept the invasion. All of which leaves me the question: How much involvement did Iran have in 9/11, if any?
 
which could raise the possibility of their oppressive regime being toppled from within.

Well, to be fair, we have to go back and answer the question "Why do they have an oppressive regime?" And the answer is: "Because the CIA overthrew their democratically elected government":

"In 1953, Iran had a democratic government. This is a very jarring thing for us to realize now because we are not used to seeing the word "Iran" and the word "democracy" in the same sentence. The fact is, however, that Iran was developing a long, rocky but democratic path in the early 1950s. For reasons which my book explains in great detail, the United States decided, in the summer of 1953, to go in and overthrow that democratic government. The result of that coup was that the Shah was placed back on his throne. He ruled for 25 years in an increasingly brutal and repressive fashion. His tyranny resulted in an explosion of revolution in 1979 the event that we call the Islamic revolution. That brought to power a group of fanatically anti-Western clerics who turned Iran into a center for anti-Americanism and, in particular, anti-American terrorism.

The Islamic regime in Iran also inspired religious fanatics in many other countries, including those who went on to form the Taliban in Afghanistan and give refuge to terrorists who went on to attack the United States. The anger against the United States that flooded out of Iran following the 1979 revolution has its roots in the American role in crushing Iranian democracy in 1953. Therefore, I think it’s not an exaggeration to say that you can draw a line from the American sponsorship of the 1953 coup in Iran, through the Shah’s repressive regime, to the Islamic revolution of 1979 and the spread of militant religious fundamentalism that produced waves of anti-Western terrorism."

Link
 
Werbung:
Back
Top