randall g wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 17:23:47 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote:


So what should we do? Nothing? That seems to be the United Nation's
current "strategy"...but I don't see much hope in that approach.



The world (ie the UN) is going to nothing, which is exactly what they
are doing with Iran. They just passed a meaningless resolution that not
only will not be enforced by any other country, but will bring the USA a
huge amount of criticism if they actually do anything.

Unfortunately the entire world is going to be working against the USA as
long as Bush is president. This is a sad and stupid fact, but it's true,
and America's enemies know it. The best thing about President H. Clinton
is that only a Democrat will get any cooperation from the rest of the
world. Even then, it will probably not be enough to save Western
civilization.

You mean like the cooperation that Billy Clinton got from North Korea?
The difference between Clinton and Bush is that Billy believed the North
Koreans would actually stick totheir agreements. Bush knows they won't
so he isn't willing to make any unilateral agreements with them.
Personally, I don't think we have a dog in this fight until they have a
weapon that can reach US soil. And even then, I don't think a
pre-emptive attack is the right strategy. We didn't attack Russia in
the 50s did we?

I think pre-emptively attacking Iran has proven to be a huge mistake and
I believe that North Korea would love nothing more than to sucker us
into something similar there. The folks that have a dog in this fight
are China, South Korea, Japan, etc. Let them police this one.


Matt