Waarom de iraanse president zo mal doet..

quote:

So, the Shia become the dominant power in Iraqi politics. The Kurdish position is protected. The Sunnis get their piece of the government, and al-Zarqawi loses his base of operations as Sunni confidence rises. There is, however one huge loser in this scenario: Iran. Iran should be going wild over what is happening in Iraq, and indeed it is. We must never forget Iran's war with Iraq and the trauma it created in Iran. Iran is obsessed with the ideal of a neutral or pro-Iranian Iraq. The U.S. maneuverings with former Baathists terrify the Iranians. They have minimal confidence in the political cleverness of Iraqi Shia, given the historical record. A coalition of Americans and Baathists is Tehran's worst nightmare. Depending on Iraqi Shia to protect their interests in the face of this coalition—interests the Shia in Iraq don't always share—is not something they can do.

It is therefore not an accident that, as their primary national security interests have been torn to shreds, the Iranians have tried to raise the ante. In ranting about the Jews and the Holocaust and moving Israel to Alaska, the Iranians are trying to play the North Korea game. The North Koreans maximize their leverage by appearing to be nearly a nuclear power and more than a little nuts. This brings the U.S.—and a bunch of other nations—to the table to negotiate with them and give them money or grain or other little gifts.

The Iranians have deliberately made it clear that they are going to get nuclear weapons and have hinted that they might already have them. Then, Iran's president started playing the role of Kim Jong Il, making it clear that he is crazy enough to use nuclear weapons.
[...]
There are many things that could complicate U.S. goals in the Middle East, but none would do so more efficiently than Israeli missiles striking Iran. Since the last thing the United States needs is an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran, and the second-to-last thing the United States wants is a new war in Iran, the Iranians are betting that the Americans will try to placate them as Washington does with North Korea.

What the Iranians want, of course, are guarantees on future Iraqi policy. They also want to make certain that their Baathist enemies are never again in a position to return to power. And they are expecting the United States to guarantee all these things. Of course the Sunnis are expecting the United States to guarantee their interests. The Kurds have always relied on the United States. And the Israelis want to make sure that the Iranian nuclear threat is not left to them to handle. Each has its own threat. The Sunnis can crank up the insurgency. The Shia can invite in more Iranians. The Kurds can try to instigate an uprising in Turkey (or Iraq, Iran or Syria). The Iranians can threaten Israel with nuclear weapons, and the Israelis can threaten a preemptive strike.

Washington does not want any of these things. That means the United States must juggle a series of nearly incompatible interests to get a situation where it can draw down its troops. On the other hand, the Shia need the Americans to protect them from the Sunnis and the Iranians. The Sunnis need the Americans to protect them from the Shia. The Kurds need the Americans to protect them from the Turks (and the Sunnis). The Iranians need the Americans to protect them from the Israelis. And the Israelis generally need the Americans.

quote:

Op donderdag 22 december 2005 14:27 schreef TrenTs het volgende:
Ik heb het gelezen, maar ik vind zelf ergens dat het nu tijd wordt dat Israël ophoudt met dat gejank over de holocaust. Ja, het was heel erg en ja iedereen heeft medelijden, maar elke scheet in jullie richting aanklagen getuigd van triestheid. Wat ze daarnaast geflikt hebben na de 2e wereldoorlog met het oprichten van dat landje en daarna de kolonist uithangen is ronduit misdadig te noemen.

Doe je eens een aardige openingspost, krijgen we dit soort stokpaardjes weer...

quote:

Op donderdag 22 december 2005 18:14 schreef TrenTs het volgende:

Ik zeik niet.

quote:

Op donderdag 22 december 2005 18:41 schreef Soul79 het volgende:
Alleen dat laatste zin in het bericht vind ik niet helemaal kloppen.

quote:

Op donderdag 22 december 2005 19:03 schreef Swetsenegger het volgende:
Of deze strategie zo slim is wanneer Bush aan het stuur staat waag ik te betwijfelen eigenlijk.

quote:

Op donderdag 22 december 2005 20:58 schreef Soul79 het volgende:

Waar nog eens bijkomt dat Israël zich bij de beslissing om wel of niet aan te vallen niet zal laten leiden door dergelijke provocaties van de president.

quote:

Provocaties dus, met dat verschil dat een Israëlische vergeldingsaanval in de 1e Golfoorlog aan Irak niet veel meer schade had kunnen toebrengen dan Desert Storm al deed,