Daniel Pipes
Mobile Edition
Regular Site

Not a great idea
Reader comment on item: President Bush Replies to My Iraq Critique

Submitted by gary (United States), Oct 26, 2006 at 22:15

Chances are the Sadrite Shia Militias backed by Iran are going to fight a protracted civil war with Baathists and Sunni factions to the death. In light of Iran's apocalyptic mahdist visions and nuclear capability, it is incumbent on the US not to allow Iran to create a client state out of Iraq.

Therefore, as politically unpalatable as it seems, the US must join forces with the remaining baathists and Sunnis (and other Islamic sunni states such as turkey and egypt) , take off the gloves and destroy all shiite forces in southern Iraq (Sadr, etc), and then drive the effort home to Tehran before they acquire a credible nuclear capability.

The gauntlet has been thrown, and the forces of civilization have NO CHOICE but to face down the forces of apocalyptic eschatology in Tehran. The US would be able to count on help from the Saudis and Egyptians. They are as afraid of radical apocalyptic shiism as we are. Shia Islam is inherentlyt radical; sunni Islam is not (with the exception of the Wahabis). Turkey is a good example of this.

I know this seems like an extreme view, but we can no more shrink from the challenge of Iran as we could from the Nazis. Iran has taken over our embassy, inspired numerous terrorists acts and sponsors hezbollah (which makes al quaeda look like boyscouts). We need to take off the gloves or the future is bleak. Mr Pipes, your proposal is a half-measure that will do nothing to stop Iran, and will potentially leave our troops as sitting ducks. We need to take the offensive here before it is too late. Thoughts?


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

Submit a comment on this item

Search by Enter name or date
Search Forum Comments:

Reader comments (23) on this item

Title By Date
West can defeat radical Islam [219 words]C SmithDec 31, 2006 23:31
At the command of Saudia [117 words]Yuval Brandstetter MDDec 23, 2006 14:33
The Bush Response [188 words]Mitzi AlvinNov 24, 2006 15:25
Iraq [311 words]clarence puckettDec 18, 2006 23:53
stay from view [101 words]John ManittaNov 24, 2006 12:39
Uninhabited zones? [398 words]bdoranNov 24, 2006 11:42
No Islamists in the PA before Bush? Ha. [127 words]David P.Nov 1, 2006 09:47
An immodest proposal [66 words]Peter HerzOct 30, 2006 18:26
more right [172 words]dfwhiteNov 9, 2006 17:47
Bush Is Right [499 words]John ROct 29, 2006 19:13
Baathists - strategic partners [115 words]VijayOct 28, 2006 13:14
Vijay is absolutely correct [139 words]garyOct 28, 2006 16:33
Not necessarily Vijay [289 words]BobNov 2, 2006 09:09
Rationale for continuing Iraq war [164 words]VijayOct 27, 2006 09:16
⇒ Not a great idea [275 words]garyOct 26, 2006 22:15
The writing is on the wall! [318 words]nick4693Nov 11, 2006 19:32
Bush is on the right track [68 words]Rick HouseOct 26, 2006 20:29
Base of Operations? [136 words]Kevin MOct 26, 2006 15:31
But what would terrorists do if they had oil money? [52 words]J. SummersOct 26, 2006 11:56
It's the oil...! [103 words]S JainOct 26, 2006 11:51
oil Schmoil [35 words]PatrickOct 31, 2006 15:43
Horse feathers! [139 words]BillDec 27, 2006 00:45
You are wrong Bill [151 words]Gary AndersonMar 11, 2007 23:34

Comment on this item

Name
Email Address (optional)
Title of Comments
Comments:

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

See the 25 most recent outstanding comments.

Back to top of page