Posted on 09/06/2004 10:58:13 AM PDT by jim macomber
This is a question to the collective analysis of the group.
I just watched an interview on Fox with the head of an interntational strategic analysis company (didn't get the name but it was something like that). At one point, he strongly made the point that not only was/is Al Queda involved in the Beslan massacre but so was Iran. And not only that (according to the interviewee) Iran is making it clear that they were involved in the "hope of provoking a response from the US?"
The interviewer (as they do) went right past that to her next predetermined question and didn't ask - to me, anyway, the obvious and compelling follow-up.
Why?
Why would Iran WANT to provoke a reaction from the US? - Because they actually think the world would side with them? (Watching the EU reaction to Beslan, you can see why they might think that.) - An excuse to nuke Israel? - Are they still operating under the illusion that we won't fight back? - And maybe the scariest question of all. Do they actually think we would turn out GWB for Kerry if they provoke a response from us?
Your thoughts?
They think Kerry is going to win and help them like he helped the North Vietnamese.
It's the same sort of miscalculation that Saddam made. Iran thinks we don't have the guts for another war in the Middle East - they are dead wrong.
I think they want nothing more than to rile up the anti war crowd in hopes of getting rid of Bush.
Mooslime clerics love their people living in rubble and poverty. A few MOABs and the clerics will be able to tell their people it is the will of Allah that they do penance. There will be more poor etc and so the Mullahs have more power. It is all about power.
1. More Musliims can be recruited to join the world-wide jihad.
2. Iran must confront the US directly in order for the current government to stay in power. If they simply try to soft peddle the issues and play both sides by attempting make themselves into a moderate, friendly state the infuluence of the US will impower Iranians to rise up in revolt against the government. The status quo will not keep them in power.
Either way, it is a matter of time before the Iranian government collapses. Let's just hope it happens before they can unleash too much more rage on the world.
They need to undermine any attempt at a Democratic government in Iraq, even one where Iraq is a Muslim state but not led by Islamists. I think the Mullahs feel threatened.
It's obvious - It's a move to get Kerry elected - If Bush reacts the media tags him with "wanting to start another one" to stay in office.
I meant to include all of you in the original post.
Transport Russian Troops to Iran to bash some heads so that they can get the answer.
"Either way, it is a matter of time before the Iranian government collapses. Let's just hope it happens before they can unleash too much more rage on the world."
I do agree with that. Iran, more so than Iraq, is ripe for unrest and even overthrow - and by its own. And they do have a degree of experience with democracy.
We need to vigorously support the opposition.
So Iran can show that Bush is a warmonger and that Kerry would be a more senstive choice.
Imho, the mullahs are thinking that they must be pre-emptive against their own young Irani citizens, who are within spitting distance of overthrowing the theocracy, first in their own minds and then in reality.
An impending state of war provides ample rationales for cracking young skulls and increasing control over the population.
As another poster said, it's all about power.
"It is all about power."
Undeniably.
> ... not only was/is Al Queda involved in the
> Beslan massacre but so was Iran.
We haven't yet seen the full Russian response.
Unfortunately, I won't be surprised if it includes
a bright flash over Tehran, and a warning that key
sites with symbolic value to the Cutthroat Cult
will be next.
Watch for suggestions from Moscow that non-muslim
countries withdraw their nationals from Iran.
Several scenrios, which somehow link together..The Iranian mullahs aren't popular at home..75% of the country wants them gone, wants a secular regime, and democracy. It could well be toppled in a civil uprising. Also, the Iranians know full well that Israel will NOT, under NO circumstances, allow Iran to go nuclear..So, all the Iranian posturing recently is a misguided attempt to deflect Israel. Iran won't be ready till late 05, at best, to produce a weapon. Therefore Israel can wait. However, since Israel's attack in inevitable, the Iranians would like it to happen before the US election, and before things quiet down in Iraq..Don't make the mistake of looking for, or assuming, logical behavior in the mullah's actions. There's a method to their madness, but, madness it still is..
The Mullahs in power are not popular and are worried about a popular uprising which would overthrow their rule. If Iran is attacked however, patriotism would ensure that all Iranians would work together to fight the invaders, whether the US, Russia, or Israel.
It is an age old remedy for domestic problems that has been used by the rulers of almost every country one time or another.
"Imho, the mullahs are thinking that they must be pre-emptive against their own young Irani citizens, who are within spitting distance of overthrowing the theocracy, first in their own minds and then in reality.
An impending state of war provides ample rationales for cracking young skulls and increasing control over the population."
- Or brings matters to a head?
As another poster said, it's all about power.
Indeed it is.
If Bush wins, there is no way Israel will be restrained from removing the clear and present danger posed by the Iranian nukes. Heck, if Bush wins it might be a joint operation. If Kerry wins, Israel will go it alone.
Bush is banking on his win, and holding (for now) the Israeli pit-bull by the leash with all his might.
--Boris
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.