Secondo Ali Ansari, sul Guardian, la “luna di miele” tra il popolo iraniano e Ahmadinejad sarebbe ormai agli sgoccioli. Ma l’insistenza dei falchi americani potrebbe aiutare Mad Mahmoud a restare in sella nonostante tutto. Una tesi bizzarra, di cui …

Yes, an increasingly bellicose Israel. Like those constant attacks on Lebanon and Gaza and near-daily calls for Iran to be wiped off the map. It’s the Guardian–it’s bullshit. Muddying the waters, indeed.

Today it’s also Pat Buchanan up to his usual bullsh*t (see link below). According to Pat Buchanan, if it looks like a falcon, and flies like a falcon, and hunts like a falcon, it’s probably a falcon, unless it’s an Arab falcon, in which case it’s only a duck, and if you’re a Jew or a neo-con (his code-word), then it’s only a harmless parakeet.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/PatrickJBuchanan/2007/01/30/hysteria_at_herzliya

Why do conservative web-sites keep publishing this guy’s drivel? He should marry Jimmy Carter and move to Bimini.

I’ve been offended twice in one sentence. Even cowboys are smart enough not to fish in muddy water.

High Desert Wanderer on January 29, 2007 at 3:48 PM

You’ve obviously never heard of grabbling.

A recent report (that I’m too lazy to link to) predicted that Iran will not be exporting oil within a decade. A lack of investment in oil infrastructure and increased domestic demand has put the regime in a bind. Until now gasoline has been a subsidized 35 cents a gallon, but Pres. Mahmoud Eichmanthenutjob has spoken of a rationing system that would allow a couple of tankfuls a month at the low price and then something closer to market rates.

In addition, Iran is a net importer of gasoline and diesel fuel. As with the drilling and pumping, Iran hasn’t invested in refineries. There are nine refineries in Iran. They operate at 130% capacity and are deteriorating. Iran has to tanker in refined gasoline and diesel to meet domestic needs.

We don’t need to nuke Iran. We don’t need to invade Iran. We just need nine cruise missiles and the mullahs’ regime will collapse in the face of the Iranian people as their economy screeches to a halt.

To paraphrase the late great Billy Sol Hurok, refineries blow good, blow up real good!

If we have secret agents deep in Iran and we somehow know that their nuke program is a long way from actually being a threat, that would explain a lot of the administration’s seemingly passive behavior..”

There-in lies a part of the problem.
We are inside.
The Dems want to expose the operators.
The Dems don’t want us to listen to terrorists anymore without a not-so-private warrant, hence going public, which exposes the operation.
We can be sure, if we lose ‘contact’ with some elements inside Iran, we can not be passive for too long. Not knowing drives people crazy.

I would like to know how many of these Persians want Armimadjihad OUT? Persians are far different than Arabs, they will stress this point.
From my tiny bit of knowledge, it seems the majority of Iranians would not want this guy in office another day, let alone til he’s got a nuke. But the Ayatolla keeps him? Whats their hidden truth?

Messrs Bush (43) and Ahmadinejab at around 35% approval ratings, and

Iran has not sorted out its basic problem, which is to be accepted in the international community as a respectable government

Sound familiar?

Wishfulness:

…in particular by an increasingly bellicose Israel and its closest ally, the US…

Iran, with its great ECONOMY (the one with high unemployment, and gas rationing) is going to help REBUILD Iraq??? HUH??? No doubt they will help (themselves) with the oil fields as well… you know… because they have done such a great job with their own (look it up, declining production…)…

BUT, it only took America 6 years to build the first Nukes, and no one knew if it could even be done… its much easier to recreate a technology, than to come up with it from scratch… if they got the fuel… they can do it… they don’t need centrifuges, there are other methods of seperating out fissionable material…

I thought interest was forbidden in Islam. Is there a different rule for Shiites?
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on January 29, 2007 at 3:25 PM

1. [2.275] Those who swallow down usury cannot arise except as one whom Shaitan has prostrated by (his) touch does rise. That is because they say, trading is only like usury; and Allah has allowed trading and forbidden usury. To whomsoever then the admonition has come from his Lord, then he desists, he shall have what has already passed, and his affair is in the hands of Allah; and whoever returns (to it)– these arc the inmates of the fire; they shall abide in it.
2. [2.276] Allah does not bless usury, and He causes charitable deeds to prosper, and Allah does not love any ungrateful sinner.
3. [2.278] O you who believe! Be careful of (your duty to) Allah and relinquish what remains (due) from usury, if you are believers.

I would say you are right! But just like anywhere else, rules/laws are subject to selective enforcement.

Fissile Fizzle?

Clever.

For the life of me I can’t think of how to refute the idea that Iran will reconstruct Iraq, the way Hezbollah rebuilt South Lebanon, as the NYT links suggests.

No one but rednecks and cowboys fish in muddy water.

I’ve been offended twice in one sentence. Even cowboys are smart enough not to fish in muddy water.

He fought to lower interest rates

I thought interest was forbidden in Islam. Is there a different rule for Shiites?

Exit question: what are the odds, do you suppose, that that intel will also end up Rorschachized?

Metaphysical certainty.

When Pakistan detonated a nuke, we were surprised.

When NK detonated a nuke, we were surprised. ‘Cause it didn’t have a big enough yield. I.e., we were surprised at their incompetence.

When Iran detonates their nuke, NO DOUBT, we’ll be “oficially” surprised again.

Same-o, same-o

The waters are being muddied. No one but rednecks and cowboys fish in muddy water.