Prague Twin

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Next Stop: Iran

The tension in the air is almost palpable. Dick Cheney announced on Saturday that all options are on the table. Last week more Iranian manufactured weapons were found in Iraq, and to top it off, Israel is seeking clearance for airstikes on Iran, specifically, they want permission to overfly Amercian contolled airspace over Iraq. Finally, and perhaps most disturbingly, Sy Hersh reports that Cheney's office is running covert operations in Iran, possibly using money laundered in Iraq, to support Sunni minorities in Iran. If true, this would be perhaps the most damning, most hypocritical action undertaken by this administration thus far, and that is saying alot.

Ok, I think we all need to stop and take a deep breath. It seems like we are on a crash course with Iran. The most likely scenario in my view is that America grants Israel its wish and provides some cover for an Israeli airstike. Iran retaliates, or America fabricates an Iranian response against the fleets on the Indian Ocean side of the Strait of Hormuz, and BOOM, the U.S. unleashes it's Iran attack plan.

I'm still wondering what the administration hopes to gain with it's reckless behavior.

Mark my words, an attack on Iran will have only negative results, similiar to the Israeli attack on Lebanon, but on a grand scale.


  • Sy Hersh reports that Cheney's office is running covert operations in Iran

    Maybe that's where all those missing billions went.

    I wonder if Cheney is selling arms to Daniel Ortega to raise money for the Iranian "contras." That would be quite a twist, eh?

    By Anonymous abi, at 1:47 AM  

  • War with Iran would be disastrous, much more so than our current quagmire in Iraq. A twist on Iran-Contra, I guess that would be Nicaragua-Sunni.

    At this point nothing would be surprising.

    By Anonymous Tom Harper, at 2:30 AM  

  • Maybe that's where all those missing billions went.

    That is one theory, and quite plausible.

    Iranian contras... that is a good one. Would that make al-Qaeda the new "Freedom Fighters?"


    Not surprising, but imagine al-Qaeda as "Freedom Fighters!" I thought they hated us for our freedom.

    The hypocricy is so thick, my head is spinning.

    By Blogger Praguetwin, at 7:31 AM  

  • I was hoping against hope, that all this action in the Indian Ocean is just a persuasive tool to help Iranians make their minds up about the "foolishness" of them acquiring nukes. In my simple mind, I just worried about a possibility that a chance for an accidental war would be created. However, there seem to be nothing accidental here, although, mind boggles to find out any rational reason for this kind of a sensless "plan". I have previously raised the concern of the possible mental health issues with this administration and I can't honestly find anything in their actions that could sufficiently dispute this conclusion.

    By Anonymous pekka, at 9:43 AM  

  • This process and what is going to be the result will be devestating, worldwide. I will not be surprised if ultimately it is the US that suffers the most. Sit back and watch as the American people and the American congress allow these madmen in Washington to destroy their own country. I am running out of compassion for them.

    By Anonymous expatbrian, at 12:03 PM  

  • And after Iran, we'll actually take on North Korea--then we'll be free to protect other Muslims from evil Muslims who want to kill them. I like that you're reading the tea leaves but three new carrier groups in the area is all you really need to know. I believe that the only thing stopping us from bombing the nuclear sites in Iran is the reality you recognize about bad things happening after. We're on the clock though and I don't mean until the White House has a Democrat in it again. Good post, but you seem to be for Iran having nuclear weapons. I'm having rough nights that Pakistan has them; Iran having them too would make them pretty sleepless.

    By Blogger Roger Fraley, at 12:51 AM  

  • Pekka and Brian agree that the administration is nuts. I can't say I disagree. The only thing that gives me hope is that Gates and the generals seem to have their heads screwed on strait.


    Quite simply, being against military action against Iran is not being in favor of them having nukes. Being against Hezzbolla does not mean you are in favor of Israel bombing the hell out of Lebanon.

    Think that through, and let me know if you can see where I'm going with that.

    By Blogger Praguetwin, at 9:23 AM  

  • OK, I've finished thinking. What is the difference, if any, between your not wanting Iran to have nukes but warning against doing anyhing about it and someone else thinking it's only fair that Iran arm itself as it sees fit? Sorry to answer a question with a question but it's what I ended up thinking.

    By Blogger Roger Fraley, at 6:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home