From Robert Scheer at Alternet:
We don’t respect or understand any religious or nationalist fervor other than our own. That myopic distortion has been a persistent historical failure of U.S. foreign policy, but it has reached the point of total blindness in the Bush administration.
The latest exhibition of this approach was President Bush’s thinly veiled threat this weekend to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities or even invade the country as a last resort, sparked by Tehran’s troubled negotiations with the West over its nuclear program.
It is telling that Bush made the comments on Israeli television, which makes them exponentially more provocative. Israel is, of course, not only Iran’s archenemy but is also believed to be the sole possessor of nuclear weapons in the immediate region.
It is as if Bush is not content to rattle his saber at Tehran’s hard-liners; he also wants to ensure that he infuriates and publicly embarrasses even moderate Iranians. …
And this editorial from Pakistan’s The Frontier Post:
Having blundered into the present morass, the Bush Administration had pinned its hopes on a weakened insurgency and new constitution to extricate itself. Wrong again. Not only can’t Washington get out, now the Shiites want to have an autonomous south while firmly in Tehran’s embrace. …
Lastly, from Salon‘s War Room:
Things just seem to keep getting better for Iran. The Shiite majority in Iraq is philosophically aligned with the Iranian government, and a new report in the Wall Street Journal indicates just how much rising oil prices have increased Tehran’s leverage in negotiations with the West to drop its nuclear energy ambitions. …
Just when you think Bush can’t possibly get any more imbecilic, he goes and proves you wrong. We don’t have enough troops to stop the insurgency in Iraq, we can’t recruit young people into the military (even with cash and benefits equal to about $140K), and George is threatening to do it all over again in Iran.
Does he believe that the rest of the world is unaware that this is an empty threat? His “bluster”, as you so accurately call it, would be comical if so many people weren’t being killed and maimed.
The primary objective of the Bush regime’s behavior vis a vis Iran is to provoke the Iranians into taking some action that will provide the administration hawks with the excuse to attack.
The originators of this whole “mideast conquest fantasy”, ( Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Michael Ledeen, Douglas Feith, Dick Cheney), have been hungering to attack Iran since the tail end of Carter presidency. And they’ve long ago lost the ability to see their insane plans against a backdrop of any sort of reality. They’re completely infatuated with their own ideology, and so nothing in the way of facts or circumstances on the ground will deter them. Even the hapless imbecile Bush ispowerless to prevent them from launching an attack against Iran, regardless of the adverse consequences.
Can anyone tell me why any administration official in his right mind would have Bush make his address on Israeli television?
Oh Susan… you are naive. He wants to infuriate the Iranians!
now how do you think I ran got so pronounced since the first of this month!!?? Can anyone say bolton? he better lay low if he knows what is good for him..but then again, he knows no better. it will soon come out about his deviousness in the un and it wont be long….
Why did Bush say it? Among the possibilities:
Why? Well, the Apocalypse is going to happen in Israel, didn’t you know that? Or are you going to be Left Behind?
Susanhu, how reliable is that editorial from the Frontier Post? I find this quote absolutely shocking:
That’s a deal the Bush administration would trumpet as success and validation for the Bush War today, and one they won’t see.
I’ve seen reports that hinted at such proposals out of Saddam’s Iraq, but I don’t recall anything this clear. Are there any other sources?
Makes me wonder what we will hear from Saddam’s trial. It also makes me wonder if Saddam will live long enough to be tried.