« ECB to do "whatever it takes" to save Euro | Main | Akin defies Romney to stay in Missouri GOP Senate race »

July 30, 2012


Tony Makara

I don't think its wise for Mitt Romney to be taking such an agressive response, I believe the best way to encourage Iran is to offer incentives rather than threats. It is bad diplomacy, tactically it burns bridges, making any change of policy that might prove more fruitful impossible as it will look like a climbdown. As long as Mitt Romney and others take a bellicose stance it hands the initiative to the hardliners in Iran and closes any opportunity for more accomodating voices in Tehran to have an influence.

Malcolm Shykles

It the US insurgents win, it will not be good for Israel. Maybe Israel is the next US target?

"Syria itself, contrary to what most western media portray, is a long-standing multi-ethnic and religiously tolerant secular state with an Alawite Muslim President Bashar Al-Assad, married to a Sunni wife. The Alawite sect is an offshoot of Shia Islam which doesn’t force their women to wear head scarves and are liberal by Sunni standards, especially in the fundamentalist places like Saudi Arabia where women are forbidden to even hold a driver’s license. The overall Syrian population is a diverse mix of Alawites, Druze and Kurds, Sunnis, and Armenian Orthodox Christians. Were the minority regime of Al-Assad to fall, experts estimate that, like in Egypt, the murky Sunni (as in Saudi Arabia) Muslim Brotherhood organization would emerge as the dominant organized political force, something certainly not welcome in Tel Aviv and certainly not in either Russia or China."

The comments to this entry are closed.



Most Updated

Other Pages


  • Extreme Tracking