3 reasons they won't attack Iran

9 February 2006

The ‘will they/ won’t they strike Iran’ debate is necessarily taking into account the Iraq debacle. Norman Solomon addresses the main arguments against the likelihood of military action in his article ‘The Iran Crisis: "Diplomacy" as a Launch Pad for Missiles.’ If you hold any of the following views it is worth considering his refutations:

Illusion #1: With the U.S. military bogged down in Iraq, the Pentagon is in no position to take on Iran.

Illusion #2: The Bush administration is in so much political trouble at home – for reasons including its lies about Iraqi WMDs – that it wouldn’t risk an uproar from an attack on Iran.

Illusion #3: The U.S. won’t attack Iran because that would infuriate the millions of Iran-allied Shiites in Iraq, greatly damaging the U.S. war effort there.

Also check the bottom of the article for evidence the Iranian Oil Bourse debate is still raging.

Trade deals, Brexit and disaster capitalism

If you're tired of Brexit, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Is the UK joining Trumpland? Does this explain Boris Johnson's kamikaze EU negotiating strategy? And could beating this deal begin a challenge to the iniquities of the global economy?

Join us for a free live discussion at 5pm UK time, 24 September

In conversation:

Nick Dearden Director of Global Justice Now and author of 'Trade Secrets: The Truth about the US Trade Deal and How We Can Stop It'

Caroline Molloy Editor of openDemocracyUK and ourNHS

Had enough of ‘alternative facts’? openDemocracy is different Join the conversation: get our weekly email


We encourage anyone to comment, please consult the oD commenting guidelines if you have any questions.
Audio available Bookmark Check Language Close Comments Download Facebook Link Email Newsletter Newsletter Play Print Share Twitter Youtube Search Instagram WhatsApp yourData