|
July 17, 2006
Forgive my slowness . . .
Other than a post expressing general support for Israel, I haven't had much to add to the discussion of the Israel/Hezbollah war. This is not because of any lack of interest, but because I'm not much of an expert on these things, I don't think I really have much to contribute. Once again, I lack access to inside information, and this makes me naturally hesitant to second guess people who not only have such access, but who are operating in the heat of battle. I got an email asking me why I missed the Hezbollah/Iranian/Iraq (via Moqtada al Sadr) connection, and I explained that I discussed the Iranian connection before, as well as Hezbollah's connection with al Qaida. The emailer left me with this interesting aside: You can thank Jimmy Carter for his work in the creation of modern day Iran. In yesterday's Inquirer, Trudy Rubin made a very interesting point: Suddenly, the G-8 agenda shifted from how the world community might press Iran to freeze its suspect nuclear program to how to prevent new Mideast wars from exploding.Rubin is of course anti-Bush (a bias she freely admits), but it would be foolish to conclude that renders her entire analysis wrong. What I'd like to know is, what's going on with Saudi Arabia? There's some interesting top-level hobnobbing with Iran right now. But trying to analyze these things from a position of ignorance is like spitting in the wind. (At times like this, I wish I had access to information.)
Sigh. (Who ever said life was fun?) UPDATE: Captain Ed discusses a NYT report indicating that Saudi Arabia thinks Iran is a bigger threat than Israel: What is clear is that even the various kleptocracies in the region have becomed unnerved by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rhetoric and brazen pursuit of nuclear weapons. The fall of Saddam Hussein removed the one military force that could stack up against Israel, and the American occupation puts Israel out of reach for most of the rest of the Arab nations. That makes any nation that deliberately invites Israeli and American retaliation a little less than rational, and the nutty rhetoric coming from Teheran only means that the Americans will stick around a little longer.That is certainly true, and I'd like to hope that most of the tough talk is just talk. (Via Pajamas Media.) posted by Eric on 07.17.06 at 10:54 AM
Comments
I don't agree with the way she stretches the facts to support her antiwar position, but I think she's right about Iran being the strongest player in the region right now. (I don't think that is the fault of the U.S. though.) And don't forget the Iran Iraq War -- "the longest conventional war of the 20th century", and cost 1 million casualties Eric Scheie · July 17, 2006 06:30 PM Thanks, Eric. I am of course aware of the Iran-Iraq war of the '80s. But I doubt that either side was really all that worried about their own casualties in that one, given their nature. And I find it hard to believe that Saddam's Iraq and Iran would not be fighting shoulder-to-shoulder against Israel and the US. pikkumatti · July 18, 2006 11:42 AM pikkumatti-I don't know. I've read compelling reports to the effect that Saddam kept up the appearance that he had WMDs solely to fool the Iranians. Those two nations (especially with Saddam in charge) hated each other impressively. Jon Thompson · July 18, 2006 03:10 PM I find it hard to believe some 130 million plus Arabs with all their oil riches can claim to be victimized by 4.8 million Isrealis. Hugh · July 18, 2006 08:53 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Nor does Trudy Rubin's anti-Bush bias permit her to make sense.
Does she expect us to believe that Syria had no friendly relations with Saddam? That is simply false. The munitions would be pouring into Syria and through them to Hezbollah even faster than they are now were Saddam still in power.
And she claims "Saddam Hussein and the Taliban - Iran's greatest enemies". Really? I don't recall Iran seeking to wipe Iraq off the face of the earth as they do Israel, nor referring to Saddam as "great Satan". I'm guessing that Israel and the US are now, and have been for some time, Iran's greatest enemies.