Has the U.S. Provoked World War III?
The analysis of an American defense report, presented through the Russian press, advanced the idea that the U.S. could, at any cost, seek the start of their own World War III. A conflict with Iran would be the catalyst to this war.
The United States has a sentimental sense of security but there is a lot of uncertainty as well, American analyst John Stanton pointed out, as quoted in Pravda. Life is much harder in countries that are burdened with a military mission, which is assumed by the political part of the regime.
In his opinion, Obama is following George Bush's example and and will invade Iran. The U.S. analyst also presented some advantages to an eventually (impossible) collaborative relationship between these two states.
A Midsummer Night's Dream: The U.S. and Iran as allied states
Extrapolating, he imagines an alliance between the two states. Gains would be immense for both states and for the world as a whole. The two alliance partners could fight shoulder-to-shoulder to stop violence in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and other states in the region. Solid cooperation between the two could counter-balance Saudi Arabia, a country that has violent Sunni extremists.
At the same time, they could force Israel to sit down and resolve the conflict with Palestine. Furthermore, there will be economic advancement on the scale of China’s achievement if the U.S. allies with this country, as well as with Turkey, India and even Russia, which would revitalize the economic situation.
All in all, however, it would be possible if the U.S. abandoned its current policy of restabilizing world “democracy” with weapons. This could be just some of the advantages to an alliance with Iran. But it is too easy to look at the past and continue to live in it.
Instead, bin Laden’s killing became a reason for national pride and celebrations in the streets of American cities. An American official has even made statements saying the U.S. military will respond to Iran if the country interferes in Iraq’s internal affairs. This is Leon Panetta, none other than the defense secretary.
The United States has a sentimental sense of security but there is a lot of uncertainty as well, American analyst John Stanton pointed out, as quoted in Pravda. Life is much harder in countries that are burdened with a military mission, which is assumed by the political part of the regime.
In his opinion, Obama is following George Bush's example and and will invade Iran. The U.S. analyst also presented some advantages to an eventually (impossible) collaborative relationship between these two states.
A Midsummer Night's Dream: The U.S. and Iran as allied states
Extrapolating, he imagines an alliance between the two states. Gains would be immense for both states and for the world as a whole. The two alliance partners could fight shoulder-to-shoulder to stop violence in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and other states in the region. Solid cooperation between the two could counter-balance Saudi Arabia, a country that has violent Sunni extremists.
At the same time, they could force Israel to sit down and resolve the conflict with Palestine. Furthermore, there will be economic advancement on the scale of China’s achievement if the U.S. allies with this country, as well as with Turkey, India and even Russia, which would revitalize the economic situation.
All in all, however, it would be possible if the U.S. abandoned its current policy of restabilizing world “democracy” with weapons. This could be just some of the advantages to an alliance with Iran. But it is too easy to look at the past and continue to live in it.
Instead, bin Laden’s killing became a reason for national pride and celebrations in the streets of American cities. An American official has even made statements saying the U.S. military will respond to Iran if the country interferes in Iraq’s internal affairs. This is Leon Panetta, none other than the defense secretary.
Next article![]( "Breivik’s Islamophobic Inspirations in the United States")
