.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

The Asylum

Welcome to the Asylum. This is a site devoted to politics and current events in America, and around the globe. The THREE lunatics posting here are unabashed conservatives that go after the liberal lies and deceit prevalent in the debate of the day. We'd like to add that the views expressed here do not reflect the views of other inmates, nor were any inmates harmed in the creation of this site.

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Open Topic Sunday ... Debate--Iran; Rebuttal

While I appreciate Sabrina's acknowledgement of my skills and talent, and I do appreciate the kind words, I must take issue with the analysis. The Strait of Hormuz is a choke point in the region that Iran can easily shut down. And even if it is temporary, the reaction in gas prices around the world could be devastating.

The UAE, while I am sure they harbor no long term grudge over the Dubai Ports deal being nixed by Congress will no doubt look at the president after he utters an excuse similar to the one she gave and ask why he did not abide by his word that he would veto the measure. Yes, Congress can be blamed by the president, but he did vow to veto the bill. Without that veto, he literally did not do everything he could to make the deal go forward. And the House did not even have a full vote. A committee did, with a vote of 62-2. Should a bill to block the sale be introduced, and the Congress has it's two-thirds majority, the president's veto could be nullified. THEN he could claim he did everything he could to stop the Congress. THEN the UAE might believe him.

But as it stands, I see no reason for them to take his word he did everything he could. And it leads us back to square one, which is the damage--unseen and unknown right now--to our alliance with the UAE. Could they overlook this? They could, and it might be prudent to do so in the face of Iran and it's aggressive stance. But there is no guarantee that they will.

This is a touchy issue, to be sure. Iran does have a loss in this scenario, and that would be to the United States should tempers fly in the event of an Iranian shutdown of the strait. Furthermore, the US has to decide if they are really ready to go after Iran militarily. This is an option that has never been removed from the table. It is always there as a last resort, if the bulk of the globe opts to turn the other cheek over Iran. We cannot afford that. It would be too dangerous. But, are we ready to engage in another stage of this war at this time? That is a question that has to be running through the DoD's mind, as well as the president's. We know he only makes such a move if it is the right thing to do, and only after his pieces are in place. This will not be a Clinton-esque engagement should we go to war with Iran. We are not going to launch cruise missiles "to hit a camel in the butt." We will commit troops and machinery to the field of battle to win the war, not fight a holding action.

The Bunny ;)


Post a Comment

<< Home

weight loss product