[Perdogg]

The problem is that there will be NO stability in Iraq until Iran and Syria are delt with.

WE have to destroy the Jaish Al Madhi and we have to comfront the Mullas in Iran.

This adminstration is wasting time with the UN. Iran will continue to cause trouble in the world unless WE, not the UN, deals with them. It's that simple.

[Stultis]

The problem is that there will be NO stability in Iraq until Iran and Syria are delt with.

Woulda been nice if Olmert had had the brains to attack Syria instead of, or at least in addition to, Lebanon. Woulda had the job half done. (Although granted that Syria is far and away the easier part.)

[Prokopton]

"The problem is that there will be NO stability in Iraq until Iran and Syria are delt with."

There never has been, and never will be, a "stable" Islamic country unless the stability was forced by a dictator at the point of a gun. Iraq was Sunni against Shiite against Kurd way before the US got there. Iran has been at war with itself throughout it's history. The same with Syria. The same can be said for every country Muslims conquered. The best we can hope for is that they fight each other to the extent we are less of a target. This is happening now in Iraq. The only other alternative is to eliminate all of them, but, with over a billion, no one is seriously proposing this.

There is no reason to believe that any Muslim country will renounce Islam to embrace democracy and individual freedom.
As these concepts are mutually exclusive, we are spinning are wheels attempting to force it upon violent, Islamic Countries. We can destroy much of the war making capabilities that can threaten us, but we can't make a people who believe in the Koran, which demands autocratic rule without individual liberty, freedom loving democrats.