Tuesday, November 21, 2006

And if the U.S. ---

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is reportedly telling European diplomats that the U.S. is incapable of waging war against Iran at the moment. There are even suggestions out of post-Election Day Washington that the Bush administration is going to ask Iran and Syria for "help" in establishing stability in Iraq. You've got to be kidding me. Tehran and Damascus are the problem, not the solution. That's why Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is moving rapidly to demonstrate his rapidly emerging leadership of the Islamic world and declaring that Iran is closer than ever to its nuclear goals. It's also why an Iranian newspaper close to the regime is insisting that the "Great War" of Israel's annihilation may start sooner than most people think.

"The United States lacks sufficient intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities at this time, which prevents it from initiating a military strike against them, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has told European politicians and diplomats with whom she has recently met," reports Haaretz, one of Israel's leading newspapers. "Rice mentioned three reasons why the United States is currently unable to carry out a military operation against Iran: the wish to solve the crisis through peaceful means; concern that a military strike will be ineffective -- that it would fail to completely destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities; and the lack of precise intelligence on the targets' locations."

Ben's response:

Of course, the U.S. could do it.

Of course, we would not say the U.S. could do it.

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course, the U.S. could do it.

Do what? -- 'wage war' against Iran? In the same way the US has done so against Iraq?

We cannot even seem to stabilize the situation in Iraq, which has about 25 million people. Iran has a population of 70 million.

November 24, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home