Important Analysis
“U.S.-Iran tensions could trigger war,” cautions an article by the AP, which appears to be just waking up to this possibility.
The behind-the-scenes struggle between the two nations could explode into open warfare over a single misstep, analysts and U.S. military officials warn.
I’m kind of hoping and expecting it will happen on purpose.
Iraq has become a proxy battleground between Washington and Tehran, which is challenging — at least rhetorically — America’s dominance of the Gulf.
Rhetorically? Don’t these people read their own news reports? It continues, blah blah blah, telling us things we already know. Iran and America are playing a deadly game of cat and mouse, al-Maliki is trying to play both sides, and the U.S. is lining up forces to that could give Iran some grief. Then comes a couple of experts:
Iran expert Ray Takeyh said the risks are all the greater because Tehran has an “unhealthy” disregard for American power, which “enhances the prospect of a miscalculation.”
I believe the miscalculation has already taken place, but he is right about the “unhealthy” disregard.
Prof. Gary Sick, a leading authority on Iran, believes the U.S. is seeking to divert world attention from the crisis in Iraq and organize a coalition of Israel and conservative Sunni Arab states to confront Iran.
“I see this as a very dangerous long-term policy because it promotes the idea that Sunnis and Shiites should be distrustful of each other, and I think that could come back and bite us later on,” he said.
I have to think the way this guy got to be such a leading expert on Iran was by completely ignoring the distractions of the Arab world. The Arabs have managed to work up concern about Iran all on their own; their attention on Iran is in fact a response to the trouble Iran is causing in Iraq and Lebanon, plus that nuke thing. Meanwhile, Sunni-Shiite distrust has already got its teeth firmly planted in our ass.
Here’s more lack of perspective:
As the rhetoric grows more strident, a U.S. military official in the Gulf likened the U.S.-Iran standoff to the buildup in hostility in Europe before World War I, when the assassination of the heir to the Austrian throne triggered a tragic war that engulfed a continent.
“A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it’s August 1914 all over again,” the U.S. officer said on condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of the issue. “I really believe neither side wants a fight.”
Wrong again. I think and hope George Bush does. More blah blah blah, then this from Kenneth M. Pollack, research director at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, former Clinton administration official, who has taken a Kerry-like stance on the war. He was for it before he was against it:
“The truth is that Iraq is a mess. It is in a state of low-level civil war. And all of these groups are largely self-motivated,” he said on the Council on Foreign Relations Web site. “But its much easier to blame it on the Iranians.”
Yes. Because of the arming and financing. We can put Mr. Pollack in the column of those who once got it, but get it no longer.
In Tehran, political analyst Hermidas Bavand said U.S. force increases were leading many Iranians to believe Washington is looking to pick a fight.
“It’s an extremely dangerous situation,” Bavand said. “I don’t think Tehran wants war under any circumstances.”
Bavand is absolutely right. Teheran doesn’t want war. Not under circumstances that entail Americans attacking Iranians in Iran, that’s for sure. They much prefer to arrange for Iraqis to attack Americans in Iraq.
And so you see how AP analysis pieces can be useful, when they are closely studied. You then learn that the Associated Press doesn’t quite get what is happening, and its reporters gravitate to like-minded ignoramuses.
Topics: Uncategorized
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 1:42 am on Thursday, February 1, 2007
6 Responses to “Important Analysis”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 1st, 2007 at 2:37 am
“I see this as a very dangerous long-term policy because it promotes the idea that Sunnis and Shiites should be distrustful of each other, and I think that could come back and bite us later on,”
They had always gotten along so splendidly, the used to hold hands and sing kumbayah. Then that idiot Chimpy McHitler Bush mucked everything up.
Who thinks the aptly named Prof. Sick, is an expert on anything?
February 1st, 2007 at 3:31 am
Compared to whom, Robert?
The Middle East “experts” on the right?
The way those guys keep getting a paycheck when they’ve been wrong every single time makes me think they’re really expert on the Soviet Union.
Drink up everyone, we’ll never get fired!
February 1st, 2007 at 3:32 am
The levels of ignorance, willful obtuseness, recalcitrance, and plain stupidity of the “experts” on this question is truly breath-taking.
This AP analysis is the logical result of bias towards, and indulgence in, the propaganda the enemy regularly spews. None so blind…, and all that rot.
February 1st, 2007 at 12:05 pm
A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it’s August 1914 all over again
Well, you have to admit, it’s a refreshing change from insisting that everything is Vietnam all over again.
February 1st, 2007 at 4:36 pm
We’re Bullying Iran?!?!?!? (Updated and bumped)
See previous: Did Iran Attack American Troops In Iraq? [image] BTW, did you notice the new Exit Strategy graphic on my sidebar yet? We’re Bullying Iran?!?!?!? Greg Tinti The New York Times’ editorial board has finally f*cking lost it completely.
February 4th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
I have always felt it is more “stern parenting” than “bullying”. If you don’t need parents than quit acting like it.