Comments on: The War on Iran gets closer as the lies come fast and furious http://www.williamkwolfrum.com/2007/02/27/the-war-on-iran-gets-closer-as-the-lies-come-fast-and-furious/ Bill Wolfrum's world of satire and commentary Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:44:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: William K. Wolfrum » Blog Archive » Get the orange juice: U.S. open to talking to Iran, Syria http://www.williamkwolfrum.com/2007/02/27/the-war-on-iran-gets-closer-as-the-lies-come-fast-and-furious/#comment-4525 Fri, 09 Mar 2007 21:00:11 +0000 http://www.williamkwolfrum.com/2007/02/27/the-war-on-iran-gets-closer-as-the-lies-come-fast-and-furious/#comment-4525 [...] While bombing the bejesus out of its neighbor, the United States has steadfastly - except when they haven’t - held firm to the concept that any type of diplomacy with Iran and Syria would be a sign that every last American is a pussy. [...] […] While bombing the bejesus out of its neighbor, the United States has steadfastly - except when they haven’t - held firm to the concept that any type of diplomacy with Iran and Syria would be a sign that every last American is a pussy. […]

]]> by: Frank B Lee http://www.williamkwolfrum.com/2007/02/27/the-war-on-iran-gets-closer-as-the-lies-come-fast-and-furious/#comment-3953 Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:10:40 +0000 http://www.williamkwolfrum.com/2007/02/27/the-war-on-iran-gets-closer-as-the-lies-come-fast-and-furious/#comment-3953 Oh, and be sure to read antiwar.com's editor's latest: <a href="http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10580" rel="nofollow">America's Alliance With bin Laden We're playing the Sunni card in the Middle East – and that means playing footsie with al-Qaeda</a> "Having handed the Middle East to Tehran on a silver platter, we are mobilizing all available forces in a single-minded effort to snatch it from them. More surrealist than Orwellian, this self-defeating rat-on-a-treadmill policy guarantees one thing: perpetual war. It is just the sort of overly "clever" Machiavellian move that is bound to backfire, and badly. One shudders to imagine the sort of "blowback" playing the Sunni card will entail. The last time we sided with Sunni radicals, we got bin Laden – and 9/11. This time, it's entirely possible we'll reap an even harsher whirlwind." Oh, and be sure to read antiwar.com’s editor’s latest: America’s Alliance With bin Laden
We’re playing the Sunni card in the Middle East – and that means playing footsie with al-Qaeda

“Having handed the Middle East to Tehran on a silver platter, we are mobilizing all available forces in a single-minded effort to snatch it from them. More surrealist than Orwellian, this self-defeating rat-on-a-treadmill policy guarantees one thing: perpetual war. It is just the sort of overly “clever” Machiavellian move that is bound to backfire, and badly. One shudders to imagine the sort of “blowback” playing the Sunni card will entail. The last time we sided with Sunni radicals, we got bin Laden – and 9/11. This time, it’s entirely possible we’ll reap an even harsher whirlwind.”

]]> by: Frank B Lee http://www.williamkwolfrum.com/2007/02/27/the-war-on-iran-gets-closer-as-the-lies-come-fast-and-furious/#comment-3952 Tue, 27 Feb 2007 15:06:11 +0000 http://www.williamkwolfrum.com/2007/02/27/the-war-on-iran-gets-closer-as-the-lies-come-fast-and-furious/#comment-3952 <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1434540.ece" rel="nofollow">US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack</a> I think Bush needs a casus belli or something he can imply is the casus belli, e.g. 9/11 (Iraq), Gulf of Tonkin (Vietnam), Pearl Harbour (WWII), Maine (Spanish-American), Lusitania (WWI), invasion by Mexico (Mexican-American War, Fort Sumter (war with Confederacy), etc. Even though Saddam had zero to do with 9/11, I think it's safe to say Bush couldn't have invaded Iraq had 9/11 not occurred. Without another 9/11 or maybe some terrible attack in Iraq that can be attributed to Iran, Bush won't get his way with Iran. US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack

I think Bush needs a casus belli or something he can imply is the casus belli, e.g.

9/11 (Iraq), Gulf of Tonkin (Vietnam), Pearl Harbour (WWII), Maine (Spanish-American), Lusitania (WWI), invasion by Mexico (Mexican-American War, Fort Sumter (war with Confederacy), etc.

Even though Saddam had zero to do with 9/11, I think it’s safe to say Bush couldn’t have invaded Iraq had 9/11 not occurred.

Without another 9/11 or maybe some terrible attack in Iraq that can be attributed to Iran, Bush won’t get his way with Iran.

]]>