Obama Wins in Iran
October 24th 2008 00:15
The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament says his country prefers Obama. On the good side he did dismiss the idea that the US will attack Iran. There is actually a bit of wisdom to this article.
Finally some believe it is not in the US's interests to attack Iran. Consider this:
"The risk was low before," he said. "But now I am 100% certain that the United States will not unleash a war against Iran. The economic crisis has cost the United States $1.4 trillion and Washington is working to resolve its internal problems and not a war."
I still believe that Ahmadinajad is nuts, but at least there is some voice of reason coming from Iran.
Finally some believe it is not in the US's interests to attack Iran. Consider this:
"The risk was low before," he said. "But now I am 100% certain that the United States will not unleash a war against Iran. The economic crisis has cost the United States $1.4 trillion and Washington is working to resolve its internal problems and not a war."
I still believe that Ahmadinajad is nuts, but at least there is some voice of reason coming from Iran.
| 44 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by D. Armenta
The Florida Keys and Everglades
The Black Sheep Chronicles
What constitutes bad manners?
The male mystique
Debate Fan
L.A.M.P.
Obama has been quoted extensively from the second and third debates as saying "We want democracy over there", and citing the need to send more troops to Afghanistan--which will not sit well with Iran at all.
Ralph Nader's the logical choice to negotiate peace with the Middle Eastern leaders, not Obama--regardless who ends up being president. Nader, whose Arabian parents immigrated to the U.S. from Lebanon, speaks the language and has always been on record as being against war..anywhere.
Given the past experiences between Middle Eastern leaders and American pols for the past few decades, trust between the two is practically nil.