LOL.

You can defend Iran’s supreme cleric, its president, and the entire Iran regime. That’s your priviledge. But that doesn’t change the facts regarding Iran’s many supreme cleric and national government leadership statements, stated goals, and regional/global actions. This information is available on the Internet for anyone to read. Iran’s leadership has a regional influence expansion agenda, and this point is not lost on the EU-3, G-8, Arab nations, or anyone who is well read on these subjects. Iran’s vile hatred of Israel, Jewish citizens and Jewish descendants is well documented, including supporting groups attacks on Jewish individuals worldwide.

Where are your facts about the innocence of the Iran regime? I haven’t seen you post any. Put them up, including links. I will gladly read them with an open mind, which I can’t say appears to be your approach thus far. Don’t believe it? Try it. It might create an interesting discussion. I am willing to look at both sides of an issue.

I feel were having debate that meant something 3 years ago, but I’m more than willing to talk about it.

I am very skeptical that Clinton, Gore, or Albright ever said that a land invasion of Iraq was justified in the run up to the war in 2002-ish. Afterall, they had all the power for 8 years previous, had the same exact intelligence that Bush had, and the most they ever did were missile strikes on 2-3 occasions.

There were elements within the Bush Whitehouse who wanted this war all along (read “Assassins Gate” if you want a great background to the war and who was pushing for it, and it wasn’t Bush or Rumsfield), but they never could have sold it to the American public without September 11th.

Elements within the CIA, DIA, NSA, and FBI were never for the war either, but civilians within the Pentagon kept manipulating the facts. Mix that with an anxiety ridden public and its easier for half-truths to prevail.

Sorry to divert the thread … it just seems to me that for the US and even for Israel, to the dismay of all local Lebanese forces, the conflict in Lebanon turns out to be about restraining Iranian power, not about a few rockets.

Unlike in our case, where the government got the degree of misinformation it specified, I’m prepared to believe that the Clinton administration did not actually ask to be lied to. What I find difficult to believe is that the British intelligence services knew it was a crock of … and the US services did not. The debate in Congress on the Iraq Liberation act http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec98/cr100598.htm of 1998 makes interesting reading, with the benefit of hindsight.

You do agree, at least, that the Bush administration had planned an attack on Iraq before 9/11? And that in the US, as in the UK, elements in the intelligence services and defence departments can at times have their own particular interpretation of the national interest?

Ms Rice is now proposing no return to the status quo ante, yet is presumably fully aware that such a change can only be achieved by a radical transformation. I’m not saying this policy will prevail in this particular instance – just that it will be a recurring theme.

Please. This is a stupid comment. Speaking as an American let me clear something up for those people who don’t live here, but seem to think along these lines. It is not mainstream in America to pursue the installation of democracies in the Middle East (we went to Afghanistan because we were attacked, and Bush was able to get support for the Iraq fiasco because he sold it as a larger war on terror and Iraq’s WMDs; nothing about democacy until we found there were no WMDs in Iraq). Have you seen Bush’s approval ratings? His ratings on foreign policy are below 40% even with Republicans. Have you read the numerous op-eds by conservatives bashing his foreign policy as of late? And these are conservatives, not liberals who didn’t like his policies all along. His last cheerleaders is the editorial board of The Weekly Standard at the folks at the American Enterprise Institute. The Heritage Foundation (the original conservative thinktank) no longer supports him on foreign policy and fiscal issues.

Back to the point of this particular post by Scott. It is stupid for there to be an international force if there is just going to be more fighting. However, Hezbollah has stated that if a deal can be made on the Shabba Farms, then they would demilitarize in the south of Lebanon and begin to only focus on politics. Israel should put them on the spot, and give the land (as well the Golan Heights) back to their original owners. Make the Arab governments live up to their word. If they can’t, then Israel will have the justification for their actions.