Views: 15460|Replies: 85

U.S., Britatin and Israel preparing to attack Iran... [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2011-11-5 19:48:35 |Display all floors
Here we go again...!

Excerpts:

Published on Friday, November 4, 2011 by The Guardian/UK

America's Itch to Brawl Has a New Target – But Bombs Can't Conquer Iran

A post-imperial virus has infected foreign policy. We've been here before, we know the human cost, and now we must stop
by Simon Jenkins

This time there will be no excuses. Plans for British support for an American assault on Iran, revealed in today's Guardian, are appalling. They would risk what even the "wars of 9/11" did not bring: a Christian-Muslim armageddon engulfing the region. This time no one should say they were not warned, that minds were elsewhere, that we were told it would be swift and surgical. Nobody should say that......

.....A virus seems to be running through the upper echelons of Washington and London, that of a moral duty to wage war against perceived evil wherever it offers a bombing target. Anyone watching last month's Republican primary debate in Las Vegas will have been shocked at the belligerence shown by the six candidates towards the outside world. It was a display of what the historian Robert D Kaplan called "the warrior politics … of an imperial reality that dominates our foreign policy", a fidgety search for reasons to go brawling round the globe, at any cost in resulting anarchy. The spectacle was frightening and depressing.

British friends of America can see all the signs of another country in the throes of "losing an empire and not finding a role", of a paranoid nervous breakdown. Britain has been there before. It should never go back. It has been warned.
© 2011 Guardian News and Media Limited

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 1

Post time 2011-11-5 20:59:51 |Display all floors
I say if they want to dig their own grave go ahead :), but lets all learn a lesson from these cowards, if they start barking alot, don't worry, like a dog that barks, it will not bite, a silent dog is a mad dog that bites, these bullies are trying to act like a mad dog but they know they are putting on a big show, because no matter how you put it the consequences on them attacking Iran will be catastrophic.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2011-11-6 02:07:13 |Display all floors
Originally posted by tinykorea at 2011-11-5 20:59
I say if they want to dig their own grave go ahead :), but lets all learn a lesson from these cowards, if they start barking alot, don't worry, like a dog that barks, it will not bite, a silent dog ...
.

haha.

At some point, when you have made the same incorrect predictions, don't you question the world view that leads you to make those incorrect predictions, year, after year, after year, after year, after year, after year, after year?

Anyway, the US isn't "conquering" anyone, even if it an attack came, it would not be like China's attack on Vietnam in 1979, which was done to acquire territory (though just how much China gained is still secret). It would look like Iraq, a disaster, morally wrong, but the US would end up leaving, just as it now is from Iraq. By the end of the year, all US troops will be out of Iraq. Their government is a Republic and free to choose to require foreign troops leave, what kind of Imperialism is that?  

The question of Iran is not imperial expansion, as it was for Britain, Japan or other powers of that era, rather their signature to the NPT and continued ignoring of the treaty obligations.

The critical view the Guardian takes however is solid evidence against this so called amazing "western" media bias. If the western media is so biased and so lying, why is it that even Chinese people very critical of the west see it as a reliable source to air the dirty laundry of "the west" I'm sure there are high Chinese officials that advocate a military attack on Taiwan, or against various countries over the Spratly Islands, and there's nothing wrong with that, it's just an opinion. But you'll never see such a critical examination of China's leadership in the Chinese press as you do of British leadership from the British press. There is a good movement among Chinese people to get a more independent press of course, and I do applaud that, it's always a gradual improvement.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-11-6 13:55:25 |Display all floors

Garbage

Originally posted by Falkenhausen at 2011-11-6 02:07
Anyway, the US isn't "conquering" anyone, even if it an attack came, it would not be like China's attack on Vietnam in 1979, which was done to acquire territory (though just how much China gained is still secret). It would look like Iraq, a disaster, morally wrong, but the US would end up leaving, just as it now is from Iraq. By the end of the year, all US troops will be out of Iraq. Their government is a Republic and free to choose to require foreign troops leave, what kind of Imperialism is that?  
  ...


1. The 1979 skirmish wasn't intended as a land grab, as you suggest... but merely as a response to Vietnam's incursion into Cambodia. A land grab for China would've been easy- just send a million men across the border.

2. NATO has 28 full members and 40 countries "associated" with it, and it still took 227 days of bombing to help the Libyan rebels to overthrow Gadhafi, who was then murdered with his bloodied corpse posted ad infinitum across the decrepid pages of the morally bankrupted western media, a disgusting and revolting celebration of goulish blood-lust that was too much even for the locals. That NATO has publicly stated its unwillingness to repeat the same for Syria and Iran comes as no surprise, particularly as these two countries probably already both have nukes.

3. Europeans should take note of the recent visit to the U.S. of the speaker of the Georgian parliament and his meeting with U.S. politicians who are pressing for Georgia to join NATO and who reject Russian "occupation" of certain areas as a result of Russia's 4 day demolition of the U.S./Israeli trained Georgian military in 2008. If Georgia is admitted to NATO as a result of U.S. pressure, Europe (and particularly Germany) would be the last place to choose for a family home.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-11-6 14:10:27 |Display all floors

The same song

Israel has been singing the same tune about attacking Iran each year, at about this time of the year, for the past 8 years.

That it hasn't carried out this threat suggests that its leaders aren't the real McCoys, unlike the zealots who sacrificed themselves at Masada 2000 years ago.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2011-11-6 14:13:11 |Display all floors
Originally posted by baofeng at 2011-11-6 13:55


1. The 1979 skirmish wasn't intended as a land grab, as you suggest... but merely as a response to Vietnam's incursion into Cambodia. A land grab for China would've been easy- just send a milli ...


1. If it was not an aggressive war and land grab, why did China gain land from it? By that standard, the US would have been justified getting land from Iraq after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. But, people here also denounce the first gulf war, so given that most Chinese people denounce the first gulf war, how is China's invasion of Vietnam ever justified? Or are there different standards for different countries?

2. Syria does not have nuclear weapons. And NATOs unwillingness to stop bloodshed in Syria has to do with many factors all blocking such action.
A. The US public is not interested in another such engagement, already Obama faced heavy opposition to the limited engagement in Libya, which was more clear cut than Syria currently is.  
B. Obama and Sarkozy have pledged to only address this issue when backed by the UN, and the US nor anyone else has even sought an authorization of force against Syria. It's not even on the table.
C. The Arab league is not calling for intervention in Syria.

3. Are you suggesting Russia will attack Germany in response to Georgia freely choosing who to ally? Why does Russia have the right to dictate who Georgia can ally any more than the US can dictate to Cuba who it can ally? Sorry, but I think you just justified the US sanctions against Cuba, since Russia is now treating Georgia the same way the US treated Cuba fifty years ago, and the US isn't even basing nuclear weapons in Georgia!

But at least you impicilty backed off the idea that the US is "conquering" people, given the plainly visible fact that Iraq is free to set an independent course, forge closer ties to China and demand US troops leave. So the gulf of misunderstanding between us is smaller already.

Also, it's great that the western media runs articles like this, examining even the highest leadership of the US and England in such a critical light.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-11-6 14:20:19 |Display all floors
Originally posted by Falkenhausen at 2011-11-6 14:13


1. If it was not an aggressive war and land grab, why did China gain land from it? By that standard, the US would have been justified getting land from Iraq after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. But ...


Gain land? Really?

1. Last I heard, there hasn't been a dispute about this border, either inside or outside of the U.N.

But please correct me if I'm wrong... with sources and evidence.

2. Keep your eyes on Georgia, Herr Falkenhausen ... just in case you need to catch a plane to South America.

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.