All-out Middle East war as good as it gets


#1

This is a long read but if you have an interest in the ME and want some excellent insight as to how it might evolve in the short term, then read this, I found it excellent…
**
All-out Middle East war as good as it gets**
By Spengler

*"TEL AVIV - It is hard to remember a moment when the United States’ foreign policy establishment showed as much unanimity as in its horror at the prospect of a unilateral Israeli strike on Iran.

In a September 10 report for Georgetown University’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, Anthony Cordesman warns, “A strike by Israel on Iran will give rise to regional instability and conflict as well as terrorism. The regional security consequences will be catastrophic.”

And a “bi-partisan” experts’ group headed by former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft and co-signed by most of the usual suspects states, “Serious costs to US interests would also be felt over the longer term, we believe, with problematic consequences for global and regional stability, including economic stability. A dynamic of escalation, action, and counteraction could produce serious unintended consequences that would significantly increase all of these costs and lead, potentially, to all-out regional war.”

If a contrarian thought might be permitted, consider the possibility that all-out regional war is the optimal outcome for American interests. An Israeli strike on Iran that achieved even limited success - a two-year delay in Iran’s nuclear weapons development - would arrest America’s precipitous decline as a superpower. *

Absent an Israeli strike, America faces:…"

read more: http://atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/NI18Aa01.html[LEFT][/LEFT]


#2

Interesting, don’t know if I would buy into it without seeing evidence


#3

Much insight and he got some decent creds I give it weight…


#4

They’ve been fighting there for how many centuries? The relative peace of modern times seems to me a temporary aberration, at best…


#5

Oh, I give it weight. The only thing that I want to know is where the people he quoted got their information from. Like the think tank and the other person. I really wish we could see the stuff they get to see.


#6

I understand, but remember its an OpEd. I write OpEds for 2 papers. I do my research very well, if I write it as fact you can bet that it is. But I am limited to about 750 words and as its really just an Opinion Editorial I do not ref or link my writings. If I did I would lose about 1/3 of my words in an already constrained article. That said I am sure there are MANY writers that do not do research and really have nothing to back up there statements…kinda like what we see here by a lot of folks.

The writer is not a lone wolf blogger, he has a international following and I suspect he is being paid. Losing creds would not be a good thing especially at the level he writes, but there may be spin involved…

Its an individual integrity thing. My career and background lying was not acceptable, in fact it was a career ending move. I have seen full Colonels stopped in mid briefing by a 3 star General and asked if that slide or supporting statement was true or not? It was not and he admitted it and the General had his security clearance pulled that day, he put in his retirement paper the next day over what was really a minor “white lie” by corp standards.