--the issue is simply about truth and justice, and not about whipping others into submission.--

Thanks!

Just read Wikipedia about the Iran/Iraq war, what incredible (...) they are...

I would like to add the following.

I should give a little more credit to Newspapers. Unlike the Think-Tank who conspire to promote a certain ideology, the Newspapers "try" to show some balance in opinions they publish.

Their balance is skewed when it comes to the Middle East for obvious reasons but they try to publish somewhat diverse opinions.

When you have Thomas Freedman calling for the bombing of Iraq or later on for its invasion, you will find some other opinion that argues the opposite.

When you have a bunch of opinions in the Washington Post justifying Israeli actions in Lebanon, you will find few (although very few compared to the latter) who criticize it.

And by the way, Mr Fareed Zakaria did support the war on Iraq. He used Newsweek (which is read by mom and dad) to make the case for it.

Know who are you dealing with.

Mr. Ali:

I couldn't agree anymore.

It is a strategy game they play in their offices in Washington. Their favorite playground now is the Middle East.

This is not restricted to officials currently serving in the administration, there are many more players:

1- Think-Tanks: I consider these one of the most dangerous unelected elements that drive all these conflicts. The Think-tanks provide "rational" justifications for all these policies and wars and they have FULL access of HIGH RANKING officials in the administration. They often hire highly educated people from prestigious schools which make them appear very credible to the average politician. You will always find high-ranking officials (including ex CIA directors, etc) on their boards.

So what are these think-tanks? Basically some sort of ideological Mafias that don't reflect the views of the people. These mafias pick carefully who can join them and once you're "made", you will have access to powerful officials in the government and even in the industry (especially military complex). Not only you will get to play with the lives of other people, you will get rewarded with a lot of money.

2- Newspapers that often publish opinion rather than news. Take the Washington Post for instance. Mr. Ignatius and Mr. Zakaria who head this thing here, often write opinion about what "we should do in the Middle East" (Zakaria does this in Newsweek, he is considered a God in there). None of them is from there, none of them even speak the language, none of them was elected to speak for us people from the Middle East. Although they are not as dangerous as the mafia think-tanks, they do have influence over the average people (who are not familiar with what the Think-Tanks do) who, if presented with an accurate picture of what goes on the ground, can stand up to the Think-Tanks and their extensions in the administration.

Dr. Ettefagh, as so many times, touches on the innermost weakness of the US standpoint: the loss of the sense of reality.

Clinton insisted that the American problems should be solved inside America. The Bush administration fell back to the earlier policies of exporting America's problems. For those who look at the reality of the political issues and who then listen to Bush's speaches, it must come as obvious that most of the accusations against the Muslims and Muslim nations and its leaders, particularly Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Ahmadinejad's Iran and all those lumped into "terrorists", are really projections of what the Bush cabinet is doing and intends to do to further its goal of making corporate power into government power and realize world hegemony. Bin Laden is one of the accomplices to this scheme to destabilize all resource rich nations for easier submission, not the portrayed number one US ennemy. Bin Laden remains elusive, as required, to accuse him of all the evils without ever ending them. The propaganda of fear used by Bush and his aides to subdue any resistance inside the US could not have been realized without a real tragic event. The Madrid bombing coincided with elections in Spain. To Bush's dismay, the Spaniards acted in the opposite direction and ousted their rightwing government. The bombings in Britain coincided with the Blair's intention to introduce similar laws as the USA Patriot Act, which is in its essence a totalitarian law, to facilitate increasing erosion of democractic rights. The most recent terrorism scare coincides with Bush's and Blair's political demise. The absence of any substantial evidence surmises that it was a political rescue operation. Bush now talks of a "war for freedom of epic proportions". But in reality, no such war is fought by the US. Instead, it is fought by the Muslims. For the Middle East the stakes are 'to be or not to be' anymore. That Muslim war is indeed, and in all aspects, an expression of mankind's will and desire for self-determination and freedom from all subjugation of historic importance and epic proportions. If and when that war is won, and the US will agree to give the Muslim victory due acceptance and legal standing, then the equality, based upon which a rapprochement of the two sides of the battle is possible, will be established. Without that, the hatred against the US government, and those who elected that government, cannot be undone, because it is the only true human response. Don't expect anyone to like their torturers and murderers and don't expect the world to pretend that US state terror isn't US state terror.

Dr. Ettefagh, as so many times, touches on the innermost weakness of the US standpoint: the loss of the sense of reality.

Clinton insisted that the American problems should be solved inside America. The Bush administration fell back to the earlier policies of exporting America's problems. For those who look at the reality of the political issues and who then listen to Bush's speaches, it must come as obvious that most of the accusations against the Muslims and Muslim nations and its leaders, particularly Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Ahmadinejad's Iran and all those lumped into "terrorists", are really projections of what the Bush cabinet is doing and intends to do to further its goal of making corporate power into government power and realize world hegemony. Bin Laden is one of the accomplices to this scheme to destabilize all resource rich nations for easier submission, not the portrayed number one US ennemy. Bin Laden remains elusive, as required, to accuse him of all the evils without ever ending them. The propaganda of fear used by Bush and his aides to subdue any resistance inside the US could not have been realized without a real tragic event. The Madrid bombing coincided with elections in Spain. To Bush's dismay, the Spaniards acted in the opposite direction and ousted their rightwing government. The bombings in Britain coincided with the Blair's intention to introduce similar laws as the USA Patriot Act, which is in its essence a totalitarian law, to facilitate increasing erosion of democractic rights. The most recent terrorism scare coincides with Bush's and Blair's political demise. The absence of any substantial evidence surmises that it was a political rescue operation. Bush now talks of a "war for freedom of epic proportions". But in reality, no such war is fought by the US. Instead, it is fought by the Muslims. For the Middle East the stakes are 'to be or not to be' anymore. That Muslim war is indeed, and in all aspects, an expression of mankind's will and desire for self-determination and freedom from all subjugation of historic importance and epic proportions. If and when that war is won, and the US will agree to give the Muslim victory due acceptance and legal standing, then the equality, based upon which a rapprochement of the two sides of the battle is possible, will be established. Without that, the hatred against the US government, and those who elected that government, cannot be undone, because it is the only true human response. Don't expect anyone to like their torturers and murderers and don't expect the world to pretend that US state terror isn't US state terror.

The current administration is incapable and unwilling to reconcile their policies and objectives with the reality of the "sensible majority". I argue the reason is two-fold; The "war-hawks" of this White House have been trying for decades to pull off a major disruption of the Middle East, for obvious and profitable reasons, and two, their personal and philisophical "trappings" involve billion dollar multinationals heavily dependent on oil, energy and military equipment, MAJOR conflicts of interest, added to an extreme interpretation of "christianity" that validates violence.

Nearly the entire world would cheer, and thank the American people for the courage to impeach, apologize and repair the damage of preemptive war and interventionist double-dealings in the affairs of other nations around the globe. Our "defense" department could "defend" the American people like never before and like no one else in the world, given a mandate from the people for a "defense only" - defense department.

Until we replace self-interested power-mongers with altruistic office-holders, we cannot hope to repair the damage.

Well said, particularly the point about the Abrahamian religious doctrines that seem to be the main culprit and driving force since the "dawn of civilization" as we know it.

Well said. Throw out the video games and start looking at the real world.