“One argument for U.S. intervention in Syria is as a message to Iran to take seriously U.S. threats toward its nuclear program—on which Obama has also painted himself into a corner by saying he will not allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. Yet military options to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons or a nuclear capability have never been very credible—bombing likely will not get all of Iran’s nuclear facilities and will likely only spur Iran to accelerate the program to deter further attacks. In fact, limited U.S. intervention in Syria may not only fail to intimidate Iran, but act as a similar nuclear accelerant.”
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=4702
Related posts:
Ron Paul: Do We Need to Bring Back Internment Camps?
Fury at the American Raj
Ron Paul: Billion-Dollar Ukraine Aid Bill Is a Bad Deal For All
Glenn Greenwald: Carmen Ortiz and Stephen Heymann: accountability for prosecutorial abuse
Is every nation on earth besides the United States "isolationist?"
Bill Bonner: Is QE Broken?
Two-Track Corporate Justice Is Not the American Way
Bitcoin is going mainstream. Here is why cypherpunks shouldn’t worry.
Bloomberg: “Libertarians Are The New Communists”
Bill Bonner: Today’s Reserve Currency = Tomorrow’s Wallpaper
US Pivot to Asia Promises More of the Same - Ivan Eland
Officer Friendly is Dead
Mining Stocks: Fool’s Gold or Diamonds in the Rough?
100 to 115 SWAT raids per day in the US
Doug French: Separating the Banking Wheat from the Chaff