ETERAZ

Mammad

I decry the intervention of any foreign force or government in the internal affairs of another country

OK, great. When can we expect your post condeming Iran for attempting to colonize lebanon by force?

asdf

I decry the intervention of any foreign force or government in the internal affairs of another country, be it the US that intervenes in everything, or the IRI in Iraq or anywherelse, if it is doing so. Foreign intervention is foreign intervention, unless it is mandated by the UN Security Council.

You are ill-informed about the no-bid contracts. Do not take it from me: Google search with the following key words: oil, Iraq, and no-bid contracts, to see what you get. If you got what I said, come back here and apologize for calling me a liar.

Finally, whether Maliki goes along with what Bush demands has no relevance to what I said: I was talking about Bush's demands, not the Iraqis reaction to it.

In your haste to respond to me - and this is not the first time you write in a hurry - you do not read carefully what I say. View me anyway you want, but as an intelligent person do what an intelligent person is supposed and expected to do.

Mammad

Sadly, we will never read

Sadly, we will never read Sadegh writing about any of this or this ???

Mammad: I don't see you

Mammad: I don't see you decry the existing Qudos force in Iraq or their IRI-funded death squads who ethnic cleansed the entire city of Baghdad out of Sunnis ...or the no bid contracts with the Islamic Republic...

BTW, your assertion regarding the 'no bid contracts' is a lie...Other European, even Russian companies have already made deals with the Iraq government.

Also, Maliki's government has not yet agreed to SOFA and it is unlikely that he will.

Anonymous500

This is one of the strangest comment I have ever read. So, all people of Iraq are either with the US or Tehran? No one is for Iraq itself, independent of both? If this is true, then I must say they are all traitors.

And regarding those on the US side:  oh yeah, absolutely, those people want to prove their "patriortism" by giving in to Bush's demands:

58 military bases; they are supposed to be "enduring," code words for permanent.

Control of Iraq's air space below 29,000 ft.

Immunity against prosecurtion for not only US soldiers, but all foreign contractors working for the US (read Capitulation, the way the US imposed on us during the Shah in 1963)

The authority to kill anybody without permission from Iraq's "independent" government, so long as they are suspected to be "terrorist". Of course, it is the US who decides.

The authority to use the bases to attack anyone and any country without Iraq's permission

Fire sale of Iraq's gigantic oil reservoirs (that already started by giving no-bids contracts to US oil companies).

Yupp! That is the way to build modern representative democracy!! One should get Nobel Prize for this discovery.

Mammad

old and senile...

Is it just me or does anybody else notice that for the past 30 some odd years, old and senile people (exception: Bush because he's just slow) have been elected to represent the Republican party in Presidential elections?

sigh

Why don't you point out that if Obama had his way US troops would have been out of Iraq 2 years ago, instead of quibbling about timelines? Obama can't take credit for supporting any of bthe things that have led to success (relatively speaking) in Iraq, because he didn't support any of them.

By the way, the "surge" troops went into Baghdad, not Anbar where the awakening councils originated. So McCain is right in that awakening councils weren't implementedin Baghdad until US forces were available to secure neighborhoods.

I actually wanted US troops out of Iraq for about the last 3 years, and didn't change my mind about that until things started getting better. So I'm not criticizing Obama. I'm just saying you aren't being fair. Why don't you criticize the media for not holding Obama's feet to the fire about his calls for early troop withdrawls? Iraq would be in a hell of a mess right now if Obama had his way.

sadly

this empty suite, obama, the second comming of jimmy carter will become the next president. god help us!
some of us are old enough to remember carter era.
prepare yourself for high taxes, high inflation, moronic people in charge, internatonal fiasco, may be even another 9/11 or another sewer style islamic republic in the mideast. bye gold and silver and diversify before everything goes down the tube.

Iranian Regime Praises

Iranian Regime Praises Obama's National Security Advisor The Iranian regime continues to be impressed with Barack Obama's top foreign policy advisor, Zbigniew Brezezinski.

THIS was the guy who helped negotiate the arms treaties that helped PROP UP the dying Soviet Union and prolonged the enslavement of a billion people??

This guy served in an administration (carter et al) that created Mugabe, and Khomeni, legitimized Jihadi nation states, created stagflation, double-digit unemployment figures, inflation rates, and interest rates? Is this country dumb enough to want to see that again? This time Carbomba won't get our embassy taken hostage, he'll get millions killed in the flash of a nuclear blast.
//www.farsnews.com/English/newstext.php?nn=87...

McCain might be a moron when it comes to domestic policies but never in foreign policy. I think the apologists for the Islamic revolutionaries in Iran hate McCain because he refuses to hand Iraq on a silver platter to Iran.

McCain is a dangerous moron.

McCain is a dangerous moron. Thanks for posting this. All the media does is pander this this guy and for no apparent reason. He has to earn our respect and he still hasn't done anything which merits it.

Counting beans: who is more fliping and floping!!

What a childish argument!!

Ladies and gentlemen: the problem in Iraq is not who is Shiite, who is Sunnite, who is Kurd, or who is Yazidi. The problem is which of these is on the side of America as agisnt Tehran.

Those who are on the side of America want American forces stay in Iraq and help the rise of a more represnetative and secular government in Iraq.
Those on the side of Tehran, want the American forces exist Iraq so that they would be able to create another mini Velayat-e Faqih in Iraq. Unfortunately this is a dichotomy that as of yet has not led to a third force to emerge.

Why do you think Obama has strated changing his tune now that he is the presumed Democrat nominee for President? Few weeks ago, he was stead fast that the IRI regime was not a danger, now he is on record that Iran is a "grave" danger. How did this happen overnight?

The same goes for McCain and his flip flops. The point is: who ever becomes the next president, will face a set of realities that has nothing to do with what CBS, or NBC, or Fox News says about the flip flops.

Here is the reality: there is a regime in Iran that is trying to get nuclear weapons, gubble up Iraq, intimidate lesser powers in the ME region, and is a potential threat to world stability and the free flow of oil to the world markets.

The strategic question is this: Mr. President (be it Obama, McCain), what are you going to do about these policies of the IRI? What are you going to do about Isreal's concerns of being anihiliated by a potential threat from Iran? What are you going to do about IRI's nuclear capabilities that is bruing capable of reaching us and our ally Isreal? These are the type of questions the national secuirty team of the next president will put in front of him the first day that he is sitting in the Oval Office as the Presdient of the USA.

Other question: Mr President do you think that we should go after Al-Qaeda in Afganistan, or after the QODS forces in Iraq? Which one of these two terrorist groups is more lethal? One that is hiding in some caves in Torra Borra, or one that has the power of a major state in the ME region behind its functioning?

The next question will be: Mr. President should we pull our forces out of Iraq and send them to Afghanistan so that we could rat out few supporters of Osama B, Laden? Or should we stay put in Iraq considering the fact as soon as we exit, the IRI will gubble up Iraq?

In short, the issue is not one of counting beans: how many Shiite versus how many Sunnite or Kurds are there in Iraq, or my fliping is more than your floping and vice versa. The main issue relates to the nature of the regime in Iraq. If it is a pro-IRI regime then it will be a continuation of the Velayat-e Faqih's policies in the region.

The task for the next president is how to follow strategies that will help the creation of an Iraq that does not pose a threat to American national interests and its pro-American allies in the region. The same applies to Afghanistan, pakistan and Iran.

The next President will have to make a strategic decision based upon American national interests as to how handle the IRI problem and not this childish argument of who is a Sunnite and who is Shiite in th region, a shallow dichotomy that a bunch of charlatans at the Columbia University have been churning and feeding to the likes of CBS and NBC. These are "Iran experts" as much as this Keith Olberman is an "impartial" journalist as the other idiot, O'Reily, is a "culture warrior"!!

Those simpletons who are finding fault with the flip flops of these two candidates hoping that they could give "true" journalism lessons to NBC, CBS, FOX, ABC etc., are just what they are: simpletons!! Wake up.

Media Matters

Since the story came to light, CBS News has offered different excuses for its egregious disregard for journalistic ethics and professional standards.

The press is the only profession granted special protection in the Bill of Rights. But with these rights comes the responsibility to provide accurate information to the American people so we can make informed decisions. While it is understood that editing is a valid part of the process of broadcasting an interview, CBS News has a responsibility to edit its interviews in a way that fully, fairly, and accurately reflects the speaker's words and meaning.

 

Tell CBS News that they need to broadcast the complete John McCain interview from the July 22 Evening News, and that they need to inform their viewers, on the air and online, about their policy on editing interviews.

IRANdokht

he could still be the next President...

If he's "meant" to win the election, he will; and even if he doesn't, he can still become the president just like in 2000.

It's just too bad that the media keeps losing cedibility more and more by pulling such stunts. 

IRANdokht

Take a breather, mid sentence.

Dude, your first sentence is 65 words long!!! Cheh khabareh? Don't you want the masses to be able to follow your train of thought? Maybe you just want to speak to a certain type of crowd. Anyway, good luck.

Ps. MacCain doesn't even use email, haven't you heard! How can he keep up with foreign policy if he isn't internet savvy? I don't care how many aids he has, if he isn't moving forward with the world, then he isn't even LIVING in this world. Not much can be expected. At least Obama has a blackberry.