It's easy to recall scores of examples of the current US government pulling the hand brake on Israel over the last 11 months. It's difficult to recall the same current US administration doing anything tangible at all to hinder Iran in that time; indeed, it's easier to recall quite a few examples where the US has actually helped finance and accelerate the spread of Iran's expansion.
Great article and video interview on i24 NEWS. Your suggestion of giving options to Iran was thoughtful and strategic.
I found the Hans Blix interview below, and along with your POV - I'm stuck on how much our American voters are risking the Heritage Foundation's 'Project 2025 / Agenda 47 ' oligarchy with our complex weapons, AI, and polarized parties which are divided between holding one of the two competing worldviews. I cannot imagine Trump in a second term.
Our elections are costing us a fortune (of wasted resources and dollars) and our military costs are tremendously expensive. I'm an environmental activist first of all, and I got sucked into volunteering for political canvassing - but then where will we find the money for fixing our polluted planet?
...Swedish diplomat Hans Blix published a book, “A Farewell to Wars: The Growing Restraints on the Interstate Use of Force,” that argues that a number of factors, including fear of nuclear war, growing public aversion to armed conflict, and increased economic interdependence, greatly decrease the possibility of large interstate wars in the future".
Last month, RS interviewed Blix, now 96, about how he developed the book’s thesis and whether the events in Eastern Europe and the Middle East in the months since its publication have affected his analysis in any way...
"In my view, diplomacy is dangerously underused today, and efforts to seek accommodation and détente seem often unfairly scorned. We should be more aware of the costs and risks of military deterrence and properly weigh them against costs and risks of restraint and accommodation. Even staunch advocates of red lines and deterrence sometimes favor limiting the role of weapons by accepting specific areas as demilitarized or free from nuclear weapons or from the stationing of foreign forces. Indeed, the nuclear weapons-free zones that cover the larger parts of the world are measures of restraint preferred to measures of deterrence."
To pro Israel neocons, the only answer to everything is to wage war and no to negotiations which has led to perpetual cycles of war and conflict. Hans Blix has it right that diplomacy is dangerously underused. “Wage peace, not war” should be the rallying cry for all who are sick of the deaths, suffering and destruction.
It's easy to recall scores of examples of the current US government pulling the hand brake on Israel over the last 11 months. It's difficult to recall the same current US administration doing anything tangible at all to hinder Iran in that time; indeed, it's easier to recall quite a few examples where the US has actually helped finance and accelerate the spread of Iran's expansion.
Great article and video interview on i24 NEWS. Your suggestion of giving options to Iran was thoughtful and strategic.
I found the Hans Blix interview below, and along with your POV - I'm stuck on how much our American voters are risking the Heritage Foundation's 'Project 2025 / Agenda 47 ' oligarchy with our complex weapons, AI, and polarized parties which are divided between holding one of the two competing worldviews. I cannot imagine Trump in a second term.
Our elections are costing us a fortune (of wasted resources and dollars) and our military costs are tremendously expensive. I'm an environmental activist first of all, and I got sucked into volunteering for political canvassing - but then where will we find the money for fixing our polluted planet?
...Swedish diplomat Hans Blix published a book, “A Farewell to Wars: The Growing Restraints on the Interstate Use of Force,” that argues that a number of factors, including fear of nuclear war, growing public aversion to armed conflict, and increased economic interdependence, greatly decrease the possibility of large interstate wars in the future".
Last month, RS interviewed Blix, now 96, about how he developed the book’s thesis and whether the events in Eastern Europe and the Middle East in the months since its publication have affected his analysis in any way...
"In my view, diplomacy is dangerously underused today, and efforts to seek accommodation and détente seem often unfairly scorned. We should be more aware of the costs and risks of military deterrence and properly weigh them against costs and risks of restraint and accommodation. Even staunch advocates of red lines and deterrence sometimes favor limiting the role of weapons by accepting specific areas as demilitarized or free from nuclear weapons or from the stationing of foreign forces. Indeed, the nuclear weapons-free zones that cover the larger parts of the world are measures of restraint preferred to measures of deterrence."
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/hans-blix/
My house has cooled down from our midweek heatwave, so I'll say THANK YOU for your great article and bid you a pleasant good evening Mr Dan Perry.
To pro Israel neocons, the only answer to everything is to wage war and no to negotiations which has led to perpetual cycles of war and conflict. Hans Blix has it right that diplomacy is dangerously underused. “Wage peace, not war” should be the rallying cry for all who are sick of the deaths, suffering and destruction.