The realist Nixon-Kissinger policy dumped the ROC for better relations with the PRC.

From strictly strategic interests dumping Israel for better relations with Iran and perhaps eventually an alliance makes a lot of sense.

In fact, geostrategically the USA often worked with the Shah of Iran because of common interests in the Gulf region.

Those common interests have not changed even if Khamenei is the head of the state.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/28/dunkin-donuts-pulls-ad-fe_n_103859.html

This kind of pressure isn't the work of the Italian-American community. I for one am tired of it.

we already live with many nuclear powers and as long as the nuclear powersource is used for generating power for constructive purposes, i'd once again say, what the hell! why not?

now using nuclear power as a means to intimidate really ought to be frowned upon.

the world needs to look forward and define peace in the present.
utopias are for dreamers with a control fixation.

the wilsonian candidate.
the sequel to the manchurian candidate.

these guys seem to do just the opposite of what they promise as a rule not an exception.

shalom aleichem.

some problems are worth solving.

This fact does not bother Phil.
The Junta was elected fairly in Phil's journalistic view.

Where are all the human shields to defend the suffering Iranian from the Junta and economical thieves of Tehran?

People still poop in the streets in India and Pakistan … it's a global economy, gotta take the good with the bad.

"I am one of those who holds that the opposite is true; that many states–Iran, among others–have leaders who are very capable of acting in ways that are profoundly irrational, hence posing a serious threat both to other countries as well as to their own. We now have a new report that says volumes on the limits of rationality of heads of state.

"George Piro, the FBI agent who interrogated Saddam Hussein over several months, has just revealed what he learned about the Iraqi dictator's mindset leading up to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. It turns out that Saddam did not expect that the U.S. would respond to his WMD posturing with a full-scale ground invasion. Saddam "told me" Piro says, that "he initially miscalculated … President Bush's intentions. He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998 … a four-day aerial attack…He survived that one and he was willing to accept that type of attack." This was not merely some minor tactical "misunderstanding" or "miscalculation" on Saddam's part; it turned Iraq into an occupied land, caused hundreds of thousands of casualties, a regime change, and, ultimately, his execution.

"(One reason Saddam opened up to this rather low-ranking agent was that he believed that the agent was a direct emissary from President Bush. This suggests how gullible even heads of state can be — not exactly what we'd consider rational.)"

Who are Americans (or in this case a Zionist academic) to call Iranian leaders irrational?

The USA maintains a racist Jewish state in the ME despite US best interests.

So what if Saddam opened up to Piro? That was Piro's job. If I interrogated Etzioni for a few months under the same conditions Saddam experienced, Etzioni would be convinced by the later sessions that I was a direct emissary from God.