| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| Europe ignores Iran's deadly mix of anti-Semitism and nukes |
| 2010-04-13 |
| Posted by:ryuge |
| #4 The law of unintended consequences has a way of intervening. We are in a dangerous situation and it's getting more so with each day. Iran has promised to damage oil production in its part of the world if it is attacked, and it's quite capable of doing that regardless of what else is done. One very likely consequence of any military action against Iran will be a drastic cut in world oil production and a drastic fall in world gross production. Scarcity is tantamount to expensive. Cheap energy supports an expanding or at least stable world economy. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-04-13 12:36 |
| #3 Elder: There has been a near-obsession by the U.S. of trying to bring about peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for 50 years. It seems this has been more of an obsession with Democratic administrations. It also seems to me that Republican administrations have been more supportive of Israel but at the same time respectful of their sovereignty. Maybe my perceptions are wrong. I do think it is imperative to be mindful of what gets communicated to the Arabs. Any perceived support of Palestinians over Israelis tends to give a green light to aggression from the Arab world. The article in the Jerusalem Post indicated that Europeans are equating the Palestinian situation now to the Jewish holocaust of WWII is just beyond the pale of credibility. Unfortunately, some believe such nonsense. It also raises the possibility that the attack on Iran will have to be very heavy and all inclusive in order to paralyze them completely and prevent retaliation by means of proxy terror groups supported by the Mullah's. All that said, the logistics of a strike on Iran are difficult. Such a strike would require impeccable intelligence since Iran's nuclear system is distributed. Moreover, they have been given sufficient time to "harden" their facilities. They have learned from the strikes on nuclear facilities in Syria and Iraq. And as you say, it is a difficult situation for Israel. A preemptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities comes across as aggressive to much of the world as you say. However, Mahmoud Ahmajinedad, like Adolph Hitler, has made promises and threats against Israel. Israelis have learned the great peril of ignoring such threats. Europeans have not. There are no 100% guarantees of successful strikes and regime change in Iran. Presently, the West is in the position of dealing with war by proxy groups. We seem to be unwilling to call such war by proxy terrorism. None-the-less it has been going on for some 40-50 years. No one can completely "game" the consequences of a preemptive strike. Judging from the strikes on Syria and Iraq, it seems like there is little concern on the part of Europe. It would certainly be helpful to Israel if it seemed like the U.S. was more committed to the survival of Israel at this time. I doubt that the West has two more years before they are confronted with a nuclear weapon; either a dirty bomb, a small nuclear device, or direct confrontation with Iran. It doesn't appear that sanctions are particularly viable as we should have learned from Iraq and Saddam Hussein. It looks like we are heading for a showdown at some point because China shows little interest in trying to rein-in Iran. Russia is playing this whole thing to their advantage. As you say they are passing the popcorn. They have to realize that mid-East wars at this time are not necessarily contained. The law of unintended consequences has a way of intervening. We are in a dangerous situation and it's getting more so with each day. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-13 12:00 |
| #2 John, The west (including Israel) has given too much time to the Mullahs to build up the nuclear capacity- I think Israel wished to give the civilized world a chance at handling the situation just in order to avoid looking like an outright aggressor. The result of this delay will be very costly to both Israel and possibly US/EUROPE ( to the absolute delight of the russians and chinese who will sit aside and enjoy popcorn). By now Iran probably has enough radioactive material for a bunch of "dirty bombs" and will use them on Israel and US, given the chance. It also raises the possibility that the attack on Iran will have to be very heavy and all inclusive in order to paralize them completely and prevent retailation by means of proxy terror groups supported by the Mullah's. This means that any strike now (and there will be a strike no doubt) will have to be much heavier in damage and scope, in order to ensure a 100% chance of toppling the Islamic regime and replacing it with a secular, saner regime. Had a brave decision been timely taken (2 years ago or earlier) the cost to the attacker and the collateral damage to innocent Iranian population would have been substantially reduced. We have not learned from History - we will now pay the price (all of us) ! |
| Posted by: Elder of Zion 2010-04-13 10:43 |
| #1 Back to the Future? By ignoring history, history repeats itself. Europe finds itself back at 1930s pre-WWII--just different players. Someone else will have to do the heavy lifting with regards to Iran. WWII started as the result of European appeasers [and sympathizers] of Nazi Germany. Europe chose the ostrich solution. Appeasement never works. Today Iran is the threat and it will be up to Israel or the U.S. to do the heavy lifting. U.S. leadership is a bit shaky at this time and appears to be pro-Islamic for the first time since the formation of Israel as a country. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-04-13 10:08 |