Article

2004-06-29 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Experts say "give in to Iran" - Carter was fright

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-06-29 04:30|| || Front Page|| [7 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Excerpt:
"We really destroyed our relationship with the Arab world, and we are now in a much weaker position with Iran" -- Joseph Cirincione, director of the non-proliferation project at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Qaddafi apparently hadn't been on the distro on that particular memo. Then again are Libyans Arabs or other?

Posted by eLarson 2004-06-29 10:24:09 AM|| 2004-06-29 10:24:09 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Condoleezza Rice told "FOX News Sunday" that the United States has been working with the IAEA and European nations to make certain the Iranians know "they only have two choices â to cooperate or face isolation."

Three choices, actually.

Posted by Anonymoose 2004-06-29 10:40:26 AM|| 2004-06-29 10:40:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 I'm sure that last one will come in a flash of *inspiration* . . .

Posted by The Doctor 2004-06-29 10:43:06 AM|| 2004-06-29 10:43:06 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 link header is a bit different than report header..
but fact is iran is a serious threat not only the iraq but to our interests in the region and ultimately our homeland. We have very few choices here. Either confront or backoff. If we backoff we have lost the confidence of the countries in the region (they would side with iran since she would then be calling the shots). If we confront then it will be difficult and bloody but needed. Remember Bush did signal them out as part of the axis of evil, we need to follow through on this.

Posted by Dan 2004-06-29 12:37:13 PM|| 2004-06-29 12:37:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 If we confront then it will be difficult and bloody but needed.

It doesn't have to be. Remember, Iran's own citizenry is pretty disillusioned with their mullahs, and they would probably be more than willing to throw off mullah rule themselves without the assistance of external forces. Material and moral support would probably suffice, with anything more at the ready if needed.

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-06-29 12:52:13 PM|| 2004-06-29 12:52:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 eLarson, Libya is Arabic. Arabs Lebanese colonized Tunisia around the time of Homer and later Arab riders conquered all of North Africa on their way up into Europe. They have Berber and Moorish bloodlines but most consider them basically Arabic.

Qaddafi isn't happy with the association though since Arabs have the smell of losers lately.

Posted by Yank 2004-06-29 1:04:29 PM|| [politicaljunky.blogspot.com] 2004-06-29 1:04:29 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Arabs Lebanese colonized Tunisia around the time of Homer...

Dude, you're about 1500 years off! Homer lived (current estimate) in the seventh or eighth century BC, whereas the Arab conquest of Tunisia was in the seventh century AD.

Posted by Angie Schultz 2004-06-29 2:21:00 PM|| [http://darkblogules.blogspot.com] 2004-06-29 2:21:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Angie: He's talking about Phoenicians, who were about as "Lebanese" as Canaanites were "Palestinians", which is to say - maybe there's some blood lineage, but the languages are totally different, religious traditions are totally broken, etc.

As far as I can tell, the Carthaginians overlords of North Africa were a minority, and the vast majority of the locals were non-Semitic folk - Numidians, Berbers, etc. Eastern Libya was settled by Greeks, in pretty much the same relation to the rest of the locals as the Carthaginians across the bay - a city-dwelling overclass dominating the best farmland and the ports, against a barbaroi backcountry.

All that being wildly beside the point, which is that Iran is far less of an Arabic country than modern Libya, as they actually speak Arabic in the latter country, and they mostly don't in Iran.

Posted by Mitch H. 2004-06-29 2:39:45 PM|| [http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/] 2004-06-29 2:39:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 #6, #7, #8 - Thanks for clearing up the Moor/Berber/Arab connection. Much appreciated.

Posted by eLarson 2004-06-29 2:49:41 PM|| 2004-06-29 2:49:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 "Tehran will only take you seriously when you are serious, when you show teeth."

So we don't involve the Europeans, right?

Posted by Secret Master 2004-06-29 6:04:25 PM|| 2004-06-29 6:04:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 He's talking about Phoenicians...

Oh. That never even occurred to me, because Arabs are from that peninsula, whereas Phoenicians are from what is now, as you say, Lebanon. Arabs live there now, but not then (at least, not in any numbers). (Or, that is to say, Arab language and culture live there now, whatever the ethnic makeup of the people.)

Posted by Angie Schultz 2004-06-29 8:10:12 PM|| [http://darkblogules.blogspot.com] 2004-06-29 8:10:12 PM|| Front Page Top

01:16 Anonymous5539
11:36 jules 187
11:10 ConservativeView
12:43 The Doctor
09:22 Anon1
09:15 Anon1
09:05 Anon1
08:58 Anon1
03:09 Super Hose
01:16 Anonymous4617
01:08 Rafael
01:05 Rafael
00:54 Aris Katsaris
00:40 Rafael
00:26 Rafael
00:04 Fred
00:00 Frank G
23:47 joy
23:41 Frank G
23:40 Frank G
23:32 Pappy
23:27 OldSpook
23:27 Aris Katsaris
23:15 OldSpook