Excuse me, but I am not hearing all that much rhetoric coming from the Republican candidates! As a matter of fact, all four current Republican presidential candidates' discussion of Iran has been tempered. It is true that with the exception of Dr. Paul, Gingrich, Romney and Santorum have all left the door open with regard to what action "might" be taken, if Iran continues its quest for nuclear armament, and both Romney and Santorum have admitted that the potential for military intervention is a distinct possibility, but NONE of the candidates have pronounced their desire to take the United States military into armed conflict with Iran.
It is also true that three of the candidates strongly oppose Iran possessing a nuclear weapon. So do I, and most Americans.
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:47 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmkahle@gmail.com> wrote:
January 24, 2012 • 3:16AM
An article published in Lebanon's The Daily Star, Bruce Riedel, who
has advised four U.S. Presidents on the Middle East and South Asia and
is now a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington,
said the danger of war against Iran is growing. He said "Iran is
rattling its sabers, the Republican Presidential candidates and others
are rattling theirs. But even if Tehran gets the bomb, Israel will
have overwhelming military superiority over Iran, a fact that should
not be lost in all the heated rhetoric."
Riedel, while he was advising President Obama on Afghanistan had said
earlier the greatest threats to America's security are the British
terrorists who need no visa to come over to the United States. He is
echoing the voices of U.S. military officers and some others, who are
concerned about the dangers that a war with Iran poses. The Chairman
of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey was in Israel
recently where he sent a clear message: "Don't attack Iran, and let
the tougher sanctions take hold." "This is getting very dangerous,"
said Jon Alterman, a former State Department official who runs the
Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International
Studies, as quoted in NPR radio on Jan. 19. "All the senior people I
know in the U.S. government are starting to lose sleep over where this
all might go."
Riedel cited former head of Israel's Mossad, Meir Dagan, saying, "Iran
will not get the bomb until at least 2015. In contrast, Israel has had
nuclear weapons since the late 1960s and has jealously guarded its
monopoly on them in the region." Moreover, Israel will continue to
enjoy the support of the world's only superpower for the foreseeable
future. Iran, in contrast, has no major power providing it with
financial help. Its arms relationships with Russia and China have been
severed by Security Council Resolution 1929, Riedel said.
Riedel concluded saying: "So, don't let the hot air from Tehran or the
Republican debates confuse the reality on the ground. Iran is a
dangerous country but it is not an existential threat to either Israel
or America."
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
