If Pappy was not being entirely "tongue in cheek," it would be fair to note that Iranian concerns about US involvement in Iraq (as he describes them) are dead-on accurate.
A successful democratic republic building its standard of living through effective capitalism and the rule of a non-theocratically dominated system of laws is the LAST thing the current Iranian rulers should desire.
Their covert support of anti-US/anti-Republican forces in Iraq is eminently logical from their perspective. If the Iraqis and we become more successful, it would almost make sense for them to intervene to "protect their Shiite brothers" and knock the whole apple cart over (even though we'd kick 'em, I believe this would gut the nation-building process for a considerable time).
I want the USA and Iraq to win, and to thereby change the Middle East, but I have no illusions as to others holding a divergent objective.
Caeser#10 -- Can we take your sterling support for individual gun ownership as a given from here on? I am willing to bet that most of the others frequenting this forum are more than aware of your stance.
Steppe': You and I disagree on a myriad of issues, though I defend your right to express yourself. I would note, however, that there are some few contexts where the use of nuclear weapons becomes "thinkable." I therefore long for the time when all parties agree to dismantle these tools. We have plenty of other mass destructive choices -- without half-lives -- available to us. I doubt I will see such an end in my lifetime, though since you have 20+ years advantage here, perhaps you will.
Seamus
Bookmarks