Letter from Iran

Fred Your Needle is Stuck

Anybody that still uses the term "lefty" most likely has an undiagnosed condition related to Pinkocommitis, which was last detected back in the fifties.

The islands are disputed, as in not agreeing on their ownership, with the parties in dispute being Iran vs the Emirates and other Gulf nations. I don't dispute that Iran owns them and has always owned them.

Once again the shallow always manage to misunderstand the difference between defending Iran vs defending IRI.

Give Iranian soil to Chinese & Russian military to use as base?

And apparently the Iranian islands are now "disputed" too.

I can only shake my head at what I'm reading here!

Righty nationalism a la the 1970s

Would only cede the same Islands to the USA. So what's the difference here?

Lefty nationalism

Iranian nationalism a la anti-American Islamist Rapist leaning lefty:

“Personally I think Iran should offer long-term military bases to China and Russia on the disputed islands in the Persian Gulf. Now that would balance things out nicely.”

Two points:

1-Islands are only disputed in the minds of the newly created fiefdoms; the islands have been, are and will remain Iranian.

2-Offering “long-term military bases” is something which the Islamist Rapists will do to stay in power and continue pillaging, raping and murdering Iranians.

Thanks to the Islamist Rapists and their lefties, Russia and China already own Iran economically, now the lefties want them to solidify their ownership with military bases.

Ain’t gonna happen, dream on!

Russia is not reliable

Supposedly Putin met with Khamenie a couple years ago and said something along the lines of "An attack on Iran is an attack on Russia".

But I think Russia will only show support for Syria and Iran only so far and will back down if a full scale Western response takes place. Russia did zilch to protect Iraq.

Personally I think Iran should offer long-term military bases to China and Russia on the disputed islands in the Persian Gulf. Now that would balance things out nicely.

Agree 100%

Especially "What we have instead is hidden power centers within the American Establishment". But at the moment, despite the rhetoric, I just don't see this imminent possibility of either Israel or the US attacking Iran in the near future. Instead I hear lots of dissenting voices about this course of action from the highest ranking uniformed members of the establishment.

To some degree an attack on Iran does hinge on what happens ultimately in Syria. 19 months have passed and the Assad regime is nowhere near being toppled despite all the misinformation and disinformation in the Western corporate media about his imminent fall. Russia is solidly standing behind Assad and daily they are making their intentions more clear: they will not stand for Western intervention in Syria or any attempts to topple him. This is a clear threat to America and its NATO allies by Russia that any further escalation or attempts to overthrow Assad by America's FSA Islamist shock-troops may be met by a direct and massive Russian involvement in Syria and other theatres. Since the Russians are going out of their way where Syria is concerned, you can imagine what their response to any Israeli or US attack on Iran may be. For starters, none of the US puppet regimes in the Caucuses, like those in Georgia or Azerbaijan, will be safe because the very next day after a US/Israeli attack on Iran Russian troops will be occupying Tblisi and Baku, which means Russia will also then have total power and control over the Trans-Caspian pipeliness. Whatever saber-rattling is going on at the moment, neither the US, the EU or their allies want this scenario.

To Frashogar:

I am almost in agreement with you but what you outline depends on sanity amongst the decision makers.

What we have instead is hidden power centers within the American Establishment that benefit from war and are eager to keep the war machine operating profitably -- which any shrink would tell you is sociopathic behavior.

Here is one case you may be interested in:

"Plot to Provoke war with Iran thwarted by Navy analyst"

//www.juancole.com/2012/08/plot-to-provoke-wa...

"Why was a Navy adviser stripped of her career?"

//www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/s...

No

It makes no difference which party is in power in the US or who the personalities are because effective war-policies are not set by the president or his party but by the military industrial complex.  They are also on record now saying they don't want war with Iran while attempting to sway Israel in the same direction; that is, against any preemptive strikes. Note the level of dissent in Israel itself within the military establishment against war with Iran. A Romney administration's Iran policy will ultimately be no different than Obama's. In fact these four year election cycles are completely meaningless where such policies are concerned. With or without Romney; with or without Obama; expect the same for the next four years as the last four.

Some good points in your article, minus

conspiracy and minus sterotyping all else was healthy discourse. 

I agree with your thesis of don't vote obama & don't vote romney.  Ron Paul May not win, but if he did, the USA woud exit from its dominaton of the middle east region for good and the IRI and other dictatorships and extremists it has strong armed into power would come to an end very quickly afterwards.

.

Our nuclear technology is a done deal, regardless of which clown would take the Oval office...............it's only a matter of time, before they learn how to live with it...................

yes

if he gets elected

there will be a war with Iran.

Relax

It's election time and there is a lot of hot air out there. Community organizer is probably still ahead so you can relax now.

First since '52: No talk of war in GOP speech

First since '52: No talk of war in GOP speech

//www.ajc.com/ap/ap/top-news/first-since-52-no-talk-of-war-in-gop-speech/nRQY7/

And also don't forget the words of previous Secretary of Defense (who was also the head of CIA, before that); "If an American president says we need a new war in Middle East, his head should be examined."

Meanwhile they'll continue to sabber rattle and confuse the bejesus out of all of us with these "War Propagandas," so the price of oil will keep going up, and all the other theft they need to do, while we're confused and clueless about the "possibility of yet another War!"

Of statistics and probability

On the subject of which party has started the most wars, excluding the Indian wars, Democrats beat Republicans 16 to 10........