Is the attack on Iran Inevitable?

[Keltoi]

The Iranian president doesn't seem to even understand what war with the United States actually means. Lot of threats and boastful language, just like Saddam Hussein.

 

[AbuAbdallah]

salaam,
I don't think the U.S. will attack Iran because Iran is a Shiite country.
As the war in Iraq has proved, the U.S. supports the Shia that are killing the Sunnis, so they will never attack Iran.
Wallahu 'Alim.

 

[Keltoi]

salaam,
I don't think the U.S. will attack Iran because Iran is a Shiite country.
As the war in Iraq has proved, the U.S. supports the Shia that are killing the Sunnis, so they will never attack Iran.
Wallahu 'Alim.

The U.S. has no more support for the Shia than they do the Sunni. The Shia are the majority population in Iraq, so of course the government will be made up of a majority of Shia.

 

[Woodrow]

I'm not too certain what the name of the game is or where the playing field is. Never mind knowing who the players or or who is on what team.


Iran, Syria invited to Iraq ‘neighbors meeting’


Announcement by Rice reveals shift in U.S. approach to regional talks



Updated: 1:29 p.m. CT Feb 27, 2007
WASHINGTON - The United States and the Iraqi government are launching a new diplomatic initiative to invite Iran and Syria to a “neighbors meeting” on stabilizing Iraq, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday.

“We hope that all governments seize this opportunity to improve their relations with Iraq and to work for peace and stability in the region,” Rice said in remarks prepared for delivery to a Senate committee. Excerpts were released in advance by the State Department.

The move reflects a change of approach by the Bush administration, which previously had resisted calls by members of Congress and by a bipartisan Iraq review group to include Iran and Syria in diplomatic talks on stabilizing Iraq.



SOURCE:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17364686/

 

[AbuAbdallah]

The U.S. has no more support for the Shia than they do the Sunni. The Shia are the majority population in Iraq, so of course the government will be made up of a majority of Shia.

I disagree. Iran does not pose a threat, becuase they are Shia. How would the U.S. be handling this situation if it was Saudi Arabia that had nuclear programs?

 

[Akil]

I don't think the U.S. will attack Iran because Iran is a Shiite country.

Totally off topic: If the original name for this group was the Shia’at Ali (party of Ali and his descendance) where did the Shiite spelling come from?

Back on topic: I think that notion is silly. The reason that the US works with the Shia more is that they are more represented by the Government and this has nothing to do with the size of the Shia population. The non-Kurdish Sunni didn’t partake in the political process and Ayatollah Sistani made voting for his list a religious obligation.

Case in point The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Arab Republic of Egypt are both staunch US allies (their populations less than the Governments themselves), while we have no such relationship with the Islamic Republic of Iran (outside of an antagonistic one).

 

[Keltoi]

I disagree. Iran does not pose a threat, becuase they are Shia. How would the U.S. be handling this situation if it was Saudi Arabia that had nuclear programs?

Iran does not pose a threat because they are Shia? I'm not sure what you're talking about there.

 

[Ninth_Scribe]

Something to think about.

I wonder if the whole big mess is escalating so much because too many people are coming up with personal agendas that would benefit them if Iran is bombed.

I wonder if the mess is the result of America being an aggressor or is it the result of America being naive and being used by people that are creating a situation and division, in order to achieve their own gains.

There are some who take these upsets as opportunities and, if the anarchy can be magnified, it makes good cover for other forms of manipulation and many other agendas. If things continue along their present courses (plural), it will be a free-for-all in the Middle East. Some believe they've hit the limit of their patience, and then of course there is the matter of various interpretations of prophecy. Add this to other natural calamities and several man-made ones, such as the report I have concerning the discovery of excessive levels of birth control hormones in the Jordon river (received by a poster after I made a sarcastic comment concerning excessive violence in Israel: Is something wrong with the drinking water?) - lets just say I'm having a problem staying on top of humanity.

In truth, it isn't just America taking liberties, though they are the most obvious element in the mix.

Ninth Scribe