T O P I C ��� R E V I E W
|
First of Two
Member # 16
|
posted
http://www.msnbc.com/news/876550.asp?0cb=-51b133692
quote: TEHRAN, Iran, Feb. 28 � Thirteen months after President Bush called Iran part of an �axis of evil,� and on the eve of a possible U.S.-led war against Tehran�s similarly vilified neighbor, Iraq, the Iranian government has quietly weighed its reputation as an international pariah against America�s superpower might. The Islamic theocracy�s conclusion, analysts and sources say, is that U.S. plans to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein should be viewed as an opportunity rather than a threat.
quote: And in the Persian Gulf, Iran has reversed its blind-eye policy toward Iraqi oil smugglers doing a brisk trade in illegal crude. Although not officially part of the international coalition that enforces the blockade, the Iranian navy also thwarts Saddam�s contraband. In its most serious engagement ahead of a war with Iraq, Iran has agreed to help the United States in search-and-rescue operations for U.S. pilots. The deal was worked out in a secret dialogue between Tehran and Washington last month.
quote: Analysts say Iran�s readiness to participate in the periphery of a U.S. war on its borders demonstrates the Islamic republic�s practical approach to the Bush administration�s policy in the region. �It�s called active neutrality,� said Hermidas Bavand, an international relations professor and a former Foreign Ministry official in the shah and Islamic governments. �By accommodating U.S. military engagement in Iraq, the expectation is that [the war] could be used as a sort of breakthrough as far as the relationship between Iran and the United States is concerned.�
quote: Iran�s cooperation with the United States could be the Islamic theocracy�s ticket off Bush�s black list. �Certain circles in Iran believed that a controlled Saddam is better than any other alternative. But common sense shows that the removal of Saddam would serve Iranian national interests,� said Bavand.
quote: If Iran succeeds in winning assurances from the United States that it is not next for �regime change,� Tehran�s ability to keep Islamic fervor in check during a conflict with Iraq will be crucial to America�s attempts to stabilize region after a war.
|
Saltah'na
Member # 33
|
posted
And let's watch as all this blows up in the U.S.'s face about 10 years later.
Me? I don't like the idea at all. I'm a little shocked that the U.S. would even consent to this. Not in a country when democracy is consistently stomped like ants on a pavement every day. But then, you have to wonder: could American influence fuel such an "uprising"?
|
Da_bang80
Member # 528
|
posted
Yes, that does seem to have a tendancy to happen...
|
MinutiaeMan
Member # 444
|
posted
But at the same time, there has been a growing reaction to the fundie government there -- civilian officials pushing for liberalization, a few of the political prisoners being released... granted there's still a long way to go, but since when did everything happen all at once?
|
Jay the Obscure
Member # 19
|
posted
Despite being part of the alledged Axis of Evil, Iran has no reason to love Iraq.
|
Nim
Member # 205
|
posted
And now that the venerable Ollie North has been let loose again and is "fighting the good fight", Iran should be twirling their moustaches about now.
|
Kosh
Member # 167
|
posted
quote:
I'm a little shocked that the U.S. would even consent to this. Not in a country when democracy is consistently stomped like ants on a pavement every day. But then, you have to wonder: could American influence fuel such an "uprising"?
It's not like it's a new thing, we supported the shah in his time, and Marcos, and a bunch of other questionable governments over the years. And Iran hate Sadam. They had a war with him before we did.
|
Sol System
Member # 30
|
posted
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet:
US voices Iran nuclear concern
Iran Nuke Program Seen Accelerating
|
Wraith
Member # 779
|
posted
Oh, good. Another one.
|
First of Two
Member # 16
|
posted
Thank Russia.
You know, the other disapproving UNSC mmember with a veto?
|
Cartmaniac
Member # 256
|
posted
Veto rights are the best thing to ever happen to members of the SC. [ March 12, 2003, 11:42 PM: Message edited by: Cartmaniac ]
|
First of Two
Member # 16
|
posted
A statement you will disavow the instant the US vetoes something.
|
First of Two
Member # 16
|
posted
Maybe this is what they mean by "bloody street-to-street fighting against Iraqi who will NEVER surrender..."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/12/sprj.irq.iraq.secret.surrender/index.html
quote: WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. officials told CNN Wednesday that "secret surrender" negotiations have begun with key Iraqi military officials in hopes some military units will not fight U.S. and coalition forces should there be a war.
Communications with these Iraqi military officials are not being handled by the Pentagon, but instead by other "elements" of the U.S. government, the officials said.
One senior official said some elements of the Iraqi military may have already agreed not to fight. This underscores assessments by both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency that the leadership around Saddam Hussein is "brittle." Officials have been making that assessment somewhat public as part of their effort to publicize Saddam's vulnerability.
|
|