100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: 20 reasons NOT to attack Iran | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/23/us-column-twenty-reasons-iran-idUSBRE87M10I20120823
Recent news stories have detailed disagreements between Israeli and U.S. assessments of Iran's nuclear capabilities and intentions. While it would appear that for now the United States does not share the apparent Israeli desire for military action toward Iran, President Obama has done everything possible to prevent the Iranians from having the ability to produce a nuclear weapon at will. His efforts against Iran have outstripped those of his predecessors, and there is no doubt that his administration has inflicted the most harm on Iran. President Obama has mobilized the world to impose unprecedented draconian economic sanctions on Iran. Even from his first months in office, he secretly ordered expansion of America's sustained use of cyber weapons against Iran, while frequently threatening to use military force. Although I believe it would be idiotic for any country to wage war with Iran, one cannot rule out the possibility. Here are 20 reasons why a military attack on Iran is a bad idea: First, Iran has become the leading country in the Muslim world advocating for an end to nuclear weapons by religiously committing itself against weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The Iranian Supreme Leader issued a Religious Decree, or Fatwa, that forbids the production, stockpiling and use of all WMDs. Second, the IAEA in the past decade, following more than 4,000 inspection hours, frequently and constantly has declared that there is no evidence of diversion in Iranian nuclear activity toward building a weapon. Third, the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) has maintained that Iran does not have nuclear weapons, has not made the decision to build them and is not on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons. The international community also accepts this conclusion. Fourth, if the U.S. were to attack Iran, it would reverse non-proliferation efforts worldwide and weaken the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Since the United States is a member of the NPT and a nuclear weapons state with more than 5,000 warheads, using the nuclear threat to attack a non-nuclear-weapons state such as Iran would be extremely harmful to the credibility of the NPT. Fifth, if Israel were to attack unilaterally, the consequences would be even more catastrophic for the NPT, since Israel is not a member of NPT and would be a nuclear weapons state threatening a non-nuclear member of the NPT. As a result, any Israeli attack would make the NPT irrelevant and its credibility in any non-proliferation efforts void. Sixth, a strike would likely neither completely destroy the Iranian nuclear program, nor cause a major delay to the program. Seventh, Iran would withdraw from NPT, suspend nuclear talks with international negotiators, kick out inspectors from all nuclear sites and hide its nuclear program. Eighth, an Israeli or U.S. strike on Iran would kill the hopes for rapprochement between Tehran and Washington for decades to come. Ninth, there is no doubt that in case of any strike, Iranians of all political stripes would rally around the flag to defend their land, integrity, identity, and rights, and to resist security threats. Tenth, President Obama's effort to improve relations with the Muslim world is one of the most important U.S. foreign policy objectives. This was highlighted in his June 4, 2009 Cairo speech, calling for a "new beginning" between the United States and Muslims. Any strike on Iran by the U.S. or Israel would revive anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world and even other parts of the globe. Eleventh, the U.S. budget is already under severe pressure because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As the United States continues to pull itself back from the brink of an economic collapse, making the case for a third war is totally unrealistic. Twelfth, the safe passage of energy from the strategic Strait of Hormuz would be in danger, and oil prices might hit $200 to $300 per barrel. Thirteenth, America's standing in the Middle East is already under mounting strain on multiple fronts. The political order in a number of "pro-American" Arab countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and Lebanon is shifting away from the United States. In the event of an attack on Iran, this trend will accelerate and may shift the balance of influence and power more toward Tehran. Fourteenth, Iran has extensive reach, influence and assets throughout the Middle East that it can tap in case of any military strikes. Iran's military will use both its own resources and those assets to rapidly spread the conflict throughout the region and beyond. Fifteenth, Iran would make the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan much more difficult and complicated, at a time when the U.S. military is stretched thin and is attempting to end its presence in both countries. Sixteenth, Israel's security is of vital interest to the U.S. In case of an Israeli attack, there would be severe consequences for both countries, with domestic pressures due to engagement in the war that would jeopardize relations between Jerusalem and Washington. This friction might shatter the bipartisan unity that supports Israel, further complicating the U.S. domestic political scene and undermining Israel's security. Seventeenth, Israel is already isolated. A war with Iran would worsen this situation and further strain both U.S. and Israeli relations with countries in the region. Eighteenth, even if Israel takes unilateral military action, the U.S. would be considered complicit in the attack, and its assets, bases and personnel would be targeted by the Iranian retaliation. Nineteenth, an Israeli or U.S. strike could dramatically widen the diplomatic split between the United States and Russia, China, and Non-Alignment Movement countries and may even create divergence with European and regional allies, reminiscent of tensions over the Iraq war. Twentieth, the chance for diplomacy is there but requires the West and Israel to adopt a more realistic position. Iran is prepared to cooperate on major elements to achieve a fair deal. These include continued work with the IAEA and capping uranium enrichment below 5 percent as a further assurance for the international community that Iran is not after a nuclear bomb. In return Iran is asking for the recognition of its legitimate rights under NPT for enrichment, in line with those accorded other member states, and gradual removal of sanctions. This is enough for the U.S. and other major powers to advance a mutually face-saving deal and limit Israeli and other hawkish efforts to derail the process. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No comments? I love shutting the war mongers up...
If this happens, mark my words, we're in for decades of brutal war I'll be back pretty soon if I see the group of bomb droppers get outa hand  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No comments? I love shutting the war mongers up... If this happens, mark my words, we're in for decades of brutal war I'll be back pretty soon if I see the group of bomb droppers get outa hand I don't know if you shut the so-called 'war mongers' up. That epithet is just more hyperbole and a typical tactic of the followers of this narrative. It is more reasonable to posit that many realise war with Iran is highly unlikely, therefore, this thread is not worth commenting on. You have to admit it is possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If this happens, mark my words, we're in for decades of brutal war 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my mind ISRAEL is the country seeking a war and trying to drag the US into it.
Cut off all military aid to Israel before they start world war 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How long now have we been warring the Muslims in the Mid East?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
whats there to discuss? the anti-israel brigade will come in and start the Israel bashing and saying good and nice Iran is...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
whats there to discuss? the anti-israel brigade will come in and start the Israel bashing and saying good and nice Iran is... Juden! Juden! |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Fri 08/24/12 07:23 AM
|
|
whats there to discuss? the anti-israel brigade will come in and start the Israel bashing and saying good and nice Iran is...  Here is how innocent Iran is! Watch the video documentary. They have only peaceful intentions. Kill the Americans? Mistranslation. Death to Israel? Just rhetoric! Watch "Iranium" and learn a little something about peaceloving Persia in the 21st century. http://youtu.be/t4IDy-0CJbE Obviously there is no reason to be the slightest bit worried about Iran's nuclear weapons program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is hard to believe anyone could buy into obvious propaganda of this magnitude.
Shut someone up? ... It just makes one shake their head and walk away. No county spreads hate more consistently than Iran. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/23/us-column-twenty-reasons-iran-idUSBRE87M10I20120823 Recent news stories have detailed disagreements between Israeli and U.S. assessments of Iran's nuclear capabilities and intentions. While it would appear that for now the United States does not share the apparent Israeli desire for military action toward Iran, President Obama has done everything possible to prevent the Iranians from having the ability to produce a nuclear weapon at will. His efforts against Iran have outstripped those of his predecessors, and there is no doubt that his administration has inflicted the most harm on Iran. President Obama has mobilized the world to impose unprecedented draconian economic sanctions on Iran. Even from his first months in office, he secretly ordered expansion of America's sustained use of cyber weapons against Iran, while frequently threatening to use military force. Although I believe it would be idiotic for any country to wage war with Iran, one cannot rule out the possibility. Here are 20 reasons why a military attack on Iran is a bad idea: First, Iran has become the leading country in the Muslim world advocating for an end to nuclear weapons by religiously committing itself against weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The Iranian Supreme Leader issued a Religious Decree, or Fatwa, that forbids the production, stockpiling and use of all WMDs. Second, the IAEA in the past decade, following more than 4,000 inspection hours, frequently and constantly has declared that there is no evidence of diversion in Iranian nuclear activity toward building a weapon. Third, the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) has maintained that Iran does not have nuclear weapons, has not made the decision to build them and is not on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons. The international community also accepts this conclusion. Fourth, if the U.S. were to attack Iran, it would reverse non-proliferation efforts worldwide and weaken the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Since the United States is a member of the NPT and a nuclear weapons state with more than 5,000 warheads, using the nuclear threat to attack a non-nuclear-weapons state such as Iran would be extremely harmful to the credibility of the NPT. Fifth, if Israel were to attack unilaterally, the consequences would be even more catastrophic for the NPT, since Israel is not a member of NPT and would be a nuclear weapons state threatening a non-nuclear member of the NPT. As a result, any Israeli attack would make the NPT irrelevant and its credibility in any non-proliferation efforts void. Sixth, a strike would likely neither completely destroy the Iranian nuclear program, nor cause a major delay to the program. Seventh, Iran would withdraw from NPT, suspend nuclear talks with international negotiators, kick out inspectors from all nuclear sites and hide its nuclear program. Eighth, an Israeli or U.S. strike on Iran would kill the hopes for rapprochement between Tehran and Washington for decades to come. Ninth, there is no doubt that in case of any strike, Iranians of all political stripes would rally around the flag to defend their land, integrity, identity, and rights, and to resist security threats. Tenth, President Obama's effort to improve relations with the Muslim world is one of the most important U.S. foreign policy objectives. This was highlighted in his June 4, 2009 Cairo speech, calling for a "new beginning" between the United States and Muslims. Any strike on Iran by the U.S. or Israel would revive anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world and even other parts of the globe. Eleventh, the U.S. budget is already under severe pressure because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As the United States continues to pull itself back from the brink of an economic collapse, making the case for a third war is totally unrealistic. Twelfth, the safe passage of energy from the strategic Strait of Hormuz would be in danger, and oil prices might hit $200 to $300 per barrel. Thirteenth, America's standing in the Middle East is already under mounting strain on multiple fronts. The political order in a number of "pro-American" Arab countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and Lebanon is shifting away from the United States. In the event of an attack on Iran, this trend will accelerate and may shift the balance of influence and power more toward Tehran. Fourteenth, Iran has extensive reach, influence and assets throughout the Middle East that it can tap in case of any military strikes. Iran's military will use both its own resources and those assets to rapidly spread the conflict throughout the region and beyond. Fifteenth, Iran would make the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan much more difficult and complicated, at a time when the U.S. military is stretched thin and is attempting to end its presence in both countries. Sixteenth, Israel's security is of vital interest to the U.S. In case of an Israeli attack, there would be severe consequences for both countries, with domestic pressures due to engagement in the war that would jeopardize relations between Jerusalem and Washington. This friction might shatter the bipartisan unity that supports Israel, further complicating the U.S. domestic political scene and undermining Israel's security. Seventeenth, Israel is already isolated. A war with Iran would worsen this situation and further strain both U.S. and Israeli relations with countries in the region. Eighteenth, even if Israel takes unilateral military action, the U.S. would be considered complicit in the attack, and its assets, bases and personnel would be targeted by the Iranian retaliation. Nineteenth, an Israeli or U.S. strike could dramatically widen the diplomatic split between the United States and Russia, China, and Non-Alignment Movement countries and may even create divergence with European and regional allies, reminiscent of tensions over the Iraq war. Twentieth, the chance for diplomacy is there but requires the West and Israel to adopt a more realistic position. Iran is prepared to cooperate on major elements to achieve a fair deal. These include continued work with the IAEA and capping uranium enrichment below 5 percent as a further assurance for the international community that Iran is not after a nuclear bomb. In return Iran is asking for the recognition of its legitimate rights under NPT for enrichment, in line with those accorded other member states, and gradual removal of sanctions. This is enough for the U.S. and other major powers to advance a mutually face-saving deal and limit Israeli and other hawkish efforts to derail the process. Signs Suggest Iran Is Speeding Up Work onNuclear Program. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/world/middleeast/signs-that-iran-is-speeding-up-nuclear-work.html?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto International nuclearinspectors will soon report that Iran has installed hundreds ofnew centrifuges in recent months and may also be speeding up production of nuclear fuel while negotiations with the United States and its allies have ground to a near halt, according to diplomats and experts briefed on the findings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JOHNN111
on
Fri 08/24/12 09:57 AM
|
|
No country spreads hate more consistently than Iran. Perhaps.... But, not one country has spreads WAR as much as good ol USA huh? 1947-49 - U.S. helps command extreme-right Greece party in Civil War. Death toll: about 70,000 contributed by US-backed forces 1948-54 - CIA directs war against Huk Rebellion in Philippines. Death toll: about 11,000 1950 - Independence movement crushed in Ponce, Puerto Rico Death toll: conservative historians estimated about 8,000 peasants 1950-53 - Korean War Death toll: about 1,776,000 1952 - CIA overthrows Democracy in Iran, installs Shah Death toll: about 20,000 1954 - CIA directs invasion of Guatemala after new Democracy there nationalized U.S.-occupied lands Death toll: about 140,000 missing and dead 1958 - In Lebanon, marine occupation against rebels Death toll: about 2,000 1960-75+ - Vietnam War including Cambodia and Laos Death toll: about 4,502,000 including civilians and resulting famines (conservative estimates) 1961 - Cuba's Bay of Pigs Invasion fails Death toll: about 4,000 1963 - In Iraq, CIA organizes coup against President and agrees to back formerly exiled Saddam Death toll: about 7,000 including civilians 1964 - In Panama, troops kill protesters against US-owned canal Death toll: about 1,000 1965 - CIA assists Indonesian coup Death toll: about 900,000 1966 - Troops and bombers threaten pro-communist parties in Dominican Republic Death toll: about 3,000 1966-96 - Green berets in Guatemala against rebels, US backs pro-American forces in country until 1996 Death toll: about 200,000 1970 - Directs marine invasion of Oman Death toll: about 2,000 1973 - CIA directs coup to oust elected Marxist president in Chile Death toll: 30,000... 3,000 later disappeared under US-installed dictator 1976-92 - CIA assists South-African rebels in Angola Death toll: median estimate at 550,000 1981-90 - CIA directs Contra invasions in Nicaragua Death toll: median estimate at 30,000 1982-84 - Marines expel Lebanese rebels, aided by Israel Death toll: 40,000 1987-88 - US intervenes for Iraq against Iran Death toll: about 150,000 during time-frame, 100,000 during Desert Storm, 350,000 from resulting famine 1989 - US invades to oust CIA-installed Panamanian government gone rouge Death toll: 2,000 1992-94 - US-led occupation of Somalia during civil war Death toll: 50,000 in combat, 300,000 by starvation 2001+ - US Occupies Afghanistan Death toll: 120,000 including civilians and combatants and resulting Opium Wars 2003+ - Iraqi War Death toll: 665,000 also by starvation, displacement TOTAL: 10,431,000 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JOHNN111
on
Fri 08/24/12 10:17 AM
|
|
Approximately 1.5 million Palestinian civilians have died since 1948,including the victims of the ethnic cleansing campaigns in the west in 1948-50 and in the east since 1967. Civilian deaths have escalated dramatically in recent years since the zionists developed their obsession with the Palestinian birth-rate,and children are often the target. There is only a small fine for killing a Palestinian in cold blood. It's based on a weapons charge,not murder. To understand the genocidal character of this vile regime,one need only glance at the responses from zionists; at least half advocate or at least imply approval of the killing of non-jews. Adocating genocide is by the way a reportable offence on Y/A. Aproximately 2000 civilian Palestinians are killed each year. If you are jewish and you shoot an 8-year-old Palestinian girl in cold blood,you will have your weapons license revoked for three months and pay a fine equivalent to 50-100 dollars U.S. It's considered by the "government'"to be more or less the same thing as shooting squirrals within city limits with a .22. would be in America. Zionists love to murder Palestinian children and they do it all the time. The military handles the mass-murders. We are not talking about suicide bombers or militants; those figures fall into another category. I am referring to wanton killing of civilians.
Source(s): Pappe,Itan. "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" (Oxford,2003). Amnesty Internation Annual Report (years 2000-2007). Hass,Amira. "Drinking the Waters at Gaza" (1996). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Fri 08/24/12 12:28 PM
|
|
Approximately 1.5 million Palestinian civilians have died since 1948,including the victims of the ethnic cleansing campaigns in the west in 1948-50 and in the east since 1967. Civilian deaths have escalated dramatically in recent years since the zionists developed their obsession with the Palestinian birth-rate,and children are often the target. There is only a small fine for killing a Palestinian in cold blood. It's based on a weapons charge,not murder. To understand the genocidal character of this vile regime,one need only glance at the responses from zionists; at least half advocate or at least imply approval of the killing of non-jews. Adocating genocide is by the way a reportable offence on Y/A. Aproximately 2000 civilian Palestinians are killed each year. If you are jewish and you shoot an 8-year-old Palestinian girl in cold blood,you will have your weapons license revoked for three months and pay a fine equivalent to 50-100 dollars U.S. It's considered by the "government'"to be more or less the same thing as shooting squirrals within city limits with a .22. would be in America. Zionists love to murder Palestinian children and they do it all the time. The military handles the mass-murders. We are not talking about suicide bombers or militants; those figures fall into another category. I am referring to wanton killing of civilians. Source(s): Pappe,Itan. "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" (Oxford,2003). Amnesty Internation Annual Report (years 2000-2007). Hass,Amira. "Drinking the Waters at Gaza" (1996). Pure Palestinian Propaganda. 1. Palestinian did not even refer to any group other than Jews until the term was hijacked in the 70's by Arafat and his cronies. Up to that time people of Arab descent in the territories were Syrians, Lebanese, Jordanian, Egyptian what have you. 2. There has never been a policy of ethnic cleansing by Israel or Zionists. They simply decline to allow for massive immigration of people wishing to eradicate the State of Israel. 3. Trying to blame all civilian deaths on the Israelis is like trying to blame all US civilian deaths (2,500,000) annually on the Canadians! Since 1950 there have to be around 50-100 million US deaths. I mean really. This is good stuff. Should be on Sat Night Live. Meanwhile, as the so-called Palestinians nee Jordanians, Syrians, Egyptians etc. are dying of natural causes in camps which they perpetuate themselves rather than resettling...Pals attack Israelis with the most heinous bombings and rocket attacks on civilians just to try to kill innocent men women and children as a form of political protest and out of racial and religious bigotry. These are those being lauded here while the Israelis who never attack unarmed noncombatants and never start offensive wars get unjust derision. Go ahead. Praise the terrorists and condemn the Israelis trying to protect themselves. All it does is generate more sympathy for the Israelis and reveal the despicable nature of the bigots who are attacking them on the basis of their religion Judaism.  Don't forget you neglected the annual civilian deaths of the other Jordanians, Syrians, Egyptians and Lebanese too....all of natural causes... C'mon Spew us some more of that Palestinian swill-ganda!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
whats there to discuss? the anti-israel brigade will come in and start the Israel bashing and saying good and nice Iran is... Here is how innocent Iran is! Watch the video documentary. They have only peaceful intentions. Kill the Americans? Mistranslation. Death to Israel? Just rhetoric! Watch "Iranium" and learn a little something about peaceloving Persia in the 21st century. http://youtu.be/t4IDy-0CJbE Obviously there is no reason to be the slightest bit worried about Iran's nuclear weapons program. Oh yeah - also you "forgot" to comment on these very real and cogent reasons why the Iranians are putting themselves in a position where the rest of the world will have to stop their nuclear program by force.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sir, I'm neutral The figures I posted are accurate
Are you for f@ckin real? You're not dealing with some basement troll here... I've traveled the world over... I've seen your degree of ridiculing others about this. It's maddening to the point where some will take sides based on that alone. Get it? 1. Palestinian did not even refer to any group other than Jews until the term was hijacked in the 70's by Arafat and his cronies. Up to that time people of Arab descent in the territories were Syrians, Lebanese, Jordanian, Egyptian what have you. No kidding? just like the inflow of Russian, Polish, Ugandan, Canadian and American Jews into Israel? no? 2. There has never been a policy of ethnic cleansing by Israel or Zionists. They simply decline to allow for massive immigration of people wishing to eradicate the State of Israel. They Decline to ALLOW... but ALLOW themselves the privilege of settlement expansion in occupied land and label it "Organic Growth"? These are those being lauded here while the Israelis who never attack unarmed noncombatants and never start offensive wars get unjust derision. I'm not denying the savagery of 8000 rockets fired(28 deaths since 2001), I'm not denying the barbaric nature of suicide bombings. You know these white phosphorous attacks were deadly against civilians... Why are you denying these war crimes? Why do you deny or find excuses for everything? If a country is responsible for blocking humanitarian relief and basic staples of life to desperate people... people who are literally starving to death by malnutrition and a constant lack of important meds for over 6 decades... 60+ YEARS! wouldn't you hold them responsible for those premature deaths? I didn't think so |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And Pallywood rolls out the spin!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And Pallywood rolls out the spin!! Give em a lil rope eh HRD? I'm sorry, you haven't added anything substantial to this thread to comment or for me to comment on... take care! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Fri 08/24/12 04:09 PM
|
|
Sir, I'm neutral The figures I posted are accurate Are you for f@ckin real? You're not dealing with some basement troll here... I've traveled the world over... I've seen your degree of ridiculing others about this. It's maddening to the point where some will take sides based on that alone. Get it? 1. Palestinian did not even refer to any group other than Jews until the term was hijacked in the 70's by Arafat and his cronies. Up to that time people of Arab descent in the territories were Syrians, Lebanese, Jordanian, Egyptian what have you. No kidding? just like the inflow of Russian, Polish, Ugandan, Canadian and American Jews into Israel? no? 2. There has never been a policy of ethnic cleansing by Israel or Zionists. They simply decline to allow for massive immigration of people wishing to eradicate the State of Israel. They Decline to ALLOW... but ALLOW themselves the privilege of settlement expansion in occupied land and label it "Organic Growth"? These are those being lauded here while the Israelis who never attack unarmed noncombatants and never start offensive wars get unjust derision. I'm not denying the savagery of 8000 rockets fired(28 deaths since 2001), I'm not denying the barbaric nature of suicide bombings. You know these white phosphorous attacks were deadly against civilians... Why are you denying these war crimes? Why do you deny or find excuses for everything? If a country is responsible for blocking humanitarian relief and basic staples of life... Well there are so many places you are wrong here. 1. The Phosphorus illumination was not attacks on people. Even those who investigated it found that they were not targeting people. 2. The Israelis SUPPLY Humanitarian aid and have never denied Humanitarian aid to the Palestinians. 3. The Israelis have no obligation to settle Palestinians and the Israelis legally captured the West Bank and Gaza during a defensive war not of their own choosing in 1967 - it is the fact that the Arab combatants in that war including the Palestinians never settled that conflict which has caused all the problems. 4. Israel has not and does not colonize the West Bank and Gaza or Sinai. Sinai was ceded back to Egypt and Gaza ceded back to the Palestinians but both areas have been abused by the Arabs to attack Israel more. Israel annexed Jerusalem and it's environs and has unified their traditional capital after 1967. In land area this annexation is negligible but it is politically charged but it is a done deal. I'm real alright and I brook no nonsense. So be prepared to have ridiculous claims illuminated. The figures you report are INACCURATE and MISLEADING. As explained above. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I heard part of a radio discussion about Israel attacking Iran today. The rumor was that Israel was going to attack before the US election (which was supposed to have some benefit that I didn't catch). The host didn't seem to think Israel was very happy with Obama so maybe it was to hurt his re-election chances ... but war usually helps a sitting president so I am not too sure of the commentator's angle.
|
|
|
|
|
