Good news from the top.
The best thing I've read all day, via MyDD, is Harry Reid saying No War with Iran:
Reid said the Middle East is a "powder keg" because of U.S. failures in Iraq, the rise of fundamentalism and the recent election of Hamas in Palestine.
"Our not being involved diplomatically in trying to solve the situation in Iran shows the Bush failure in foreign policy there and elsewhere."
And he said the U.S. has no military option in Iran.
"We don't have the resources to do it" because of the ongoing war in Iraq," he said.
Chris writes that "Apart from the fact that threatening to nuke a country that hasn't attacked you is insane and exactly the sort of reckless action we fear from a country like, say, North Korea, the number one reason why there are no good military options in Iran is because Bush and company are still in charge of the military." That's probably the right political angle, but Bush being in charge of the military is only, in my view, the number two reason why a military strike on Iran is a bad idea, though maybe the number one reason to fear one. The number one reason is closer to the North Korea thing: attacking Iran would virtually end, for a generation at least, the US' and its allies' ability to exert a modernizing, moderating influence on the world stage and on much of the Islamic developing world. There's a legacy for you.
Reid said the Middle East is a "powder keg" because of U.S. failures in Iraq, the rise of fundamentalism and the recent election of Hamas in Palestine.
"Our not being involved diplomatically in trying to solve the situation in Iran shows the Bush failure in foreign policy there and elsewhere."
And he said the U.S. has no military option in Iran.
"We don't have the resources to do it" because of the ongoing war in Iraq," he said.
Chris writes that "Apart from the fact that threatening to nuke a country that hasn't attacked you is insane and exactly the sort of reckless action we fear from a country like, say, North Korea, the number one reason why there are no good military options in Iran is because Bush and company are still in charge of the military." That's probably the right political angle, but Bush being in charge of the military is only, in my view, the number two reason why a military strike on Iran is a bad idea, though maybe the number one reason to fear one. The number one reason is closer to the North Korea thing: attacking Iran would virtually end, for a generation at least, the US' and its allies' ability to exert a modernizing, moderating influence on the world stage and on much of the Islamic developing world. There's a legacy for you.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home