ping
Hold on. "an excuse for openly supporting terrorist organizations?" I thought they're already doing that.
I don't read Hersh, but I DO read Ledeen.
Have you seen this thread?
You might be interested, if you haven't.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1325430/posts
It's good to see you. ;o)
Whenever a Islamicist says you're about to make a mistake, you know you're on the right track.
Elections there in a week. It's a testament to the falsity of that claim.
Good article. I agree. Except i think that Iraq is headed towards a democratic regime, however the situation in Iraq is different than Iran. There is absolutely no need or desire for an attack on Iran.
"Writing in the Jan. 20 issue of the New Yorker, leading investigative writer Seymour Hersh.."
The New Yorker?? Seymour Hersh??
Nuff said.
SYS0013: Encountered "leading investigative writer Seymour Hersh" where [reliable source] was expected.They're not very well informed, are they? Iran already cracks down on democratic movements as best it can, and already is openly aligned and giving material support to terrorists.
The primary goal is to eliminate the threat, which is the regime and their armaments. Once the regime is gone, what do you think the Iranians are going to do... reject what they've been working to achieve all these years? I doubt it.
I don't think those journalists have any comprehension of the capabilities of the US military. They probably think a war would look something like the Iran-Iraq clusterf$ck of the 1980s.