"Bombing does not constitute an invasion."
I would consider it more of an attack
"thought Tom Friedman had a good answer to those fearing that Iran might "win" in Iraq. "And Iran, you win yes, if we leave, you win the right to try to manage Iraqs Shiites. Have a nice day."
Can Tom Friedman finally have it right?
I seem to recall that Toms columns pre Iraq invasion were very much pro the dirty deed. Tom Friedman is also the guy who helped place the sole blame for the failure at camp david 2000 on Arafat. Friedman & his good buddy Dennis Ross, lead US negotiator at Camp David are cofounders of a conservative synagogue near Bethesda, MD. I suppose Arafat (and areal peace) never had a chance. The result - second intifada. Fast forward September 11, 2001. Bin Laden is precise in why his Kamikazee pilots struck (although his words had to be found in the foriegn press as mainstream US would not touch it) foremost of his grievances was the unconditional support by the US of the brutal occupation of the palestinian people. You would never see Friedman or the Times discuss this. You see they both have an agenda.
Will the US attack Iran - quite possibly over the nuclear issue. Iran might best declare "nuclear ambiguity"http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/03/whitehouse200703?printable=true¤tPage=al