[Rhodes22-list] Iraq-It Is Still There

[Brad Haslett]

Dave,

You wrote, "It's OK if we send terrorists and explosives into Iran, but it's
absolutely
NOT OK  if they do it to us - right?"

No shit Sherlock!

Do you really put 7th century mentality on the same par with 21st century
Western Civilization?

Sue me!

Brad



On 6/28/07, DCLewis1 at aol.com <DCLewis1 at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's interesting that we're starting to hear more and more about the
> terrible threat Iran poses. To me, the Iranian stories parallel a ramp-up
> in
> internal US propaganda prior to the invasion of Iraq. For example we hear
> that  Iran
> is sending IED materials to Iraq - and that's certainly a terrible  thing.
> Oh, and they have WMD!
>
> Interesting story, I think it appeared in Mondays WSJ, if memory  serves
> it
> was the top story on pg A6, - you will NEVER GUESS who's harboring,
> sponsoring, and supplying terrorists in Iraq that move across the border
> to do  their
> dirty deeds in Iran in an effort to destabilize the Iranian  government.
> Well,
> maybe you would guess.  I've found a related  editorial on the web using
> the
> search terms MeK WSJ, you may find other  material:
>
> _http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/06/25/why-iran-us-stand-far-apart/?mod=hpp
> _us_blogs_
> (
> http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/06/25/why-iran-us-stand-far-apart/?mod=hpp_us_blogs
> )
>
> It's OK if we send terrorists and explosives into Iran, but it's
> absolutely
> NOT OK  if they do it to us - right?
>
> Seems to me we've got more than our hands full with Iraq (MilBlogger
> optimism about "all the good things happening"
> notwithstanding).  Cordoning  off the
> border to Iran might be a good start, but probing into Iran with
> irregulars/terrorists seems like a good way to enlarge a conflict
> we're  demonstrably not
> winning.  With the ramp-up in internal US propaganda  and our support for
> terrorists/irregulars inside Iran,  I'm a little  concerned that enlarging
> the
> conflict is the name of the neocon game.
>
> You might want to read the article at your lib, if you don't have Mon's
> WSJ
> handy, as I recall it goes into much more detail than the web link.
>
> DaveL
>
>
>
>
> ************************************** See what's free at
> http://www.aol.com.
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list