Posted on 01/20/2006 10:16:08 PM PST by jmc1969
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Vice President Dick Cheney has said he does not believe there are close relations between Iran and Al-Qaeda, seeming to distance himself from some earlier US administration charges.
"I think you've got to remember that the Al-Qaeda organization is primarily made up of radical Sunni Islamists, of course, and the Iranian regime is Shia-dominated -- Shia. So there's not a natural fit there," Cheney said in a telephone interview with the Hugh Hewitt Show, released by the White House.
"That doesn't mean that there haven't been relationships over the years, but I don't believe it's close. I haven't seen any evidence of that," Cheney added on the heels of new broadcast threats by Osama bin Laden.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Interesting. I'm a bit surprised although there's certainly no love lost between Al Qaeda and Iran. This does seem a bit of a shift from past comments however.
Are we gonna give Iran a pass now and let them go nuclear?
Iran is all about Hezbollah.
I sure hope not. Al Qaeda is hardly the end all and be all of America's foreign policy. As far as I'm concerned, we should take out Iran's nuke facilities ASAP - and North Korea's too while we're out it.
It would seem to be obvious, but it doesn't sit right.
Hamas and IJ too...
A nuclear Iran would be a disaster. A nuclear NK is a mere annoyance by comparison. So, on second thought, we should just ignore the NKs for the piddling little failed nation they are. Iran on the other hand should be taken out ASAP.
Then we need to remember this is out of context Leftist propaganda we are reading here...
There is a well-founded suspicion that Iran and al-Qaeda are in competition for leadership of the radical Islamist movement.
Cheney is probably right when he speculates that a.) there is a relationship, but b.) it ain't close -- it being very much based on "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
Consider the WW II alliance between Germany and Japan as a probable model.
Well, all I read and referred to was Cheney's quote, and I doubt that's Leftist propaganda. The fact of the matter is that there's no evidence of friendship, much less collaboration, between Iran and Al Qaeda. Their objectives are if anything in serious conflict with one another. Moreover, we hardly need to justify action against Iran based on some fictional connection to Al Qaeda. That would more undermine our foreign policy because it so clearly isn't there.
I'm very concerned of the talk by UN/IAEA/US State Dept policy wonks about a "civilian" fuel cycle in Iran.
Me too. Iran is a serious problem and I'm not totally sure what the answer is. We can defeat Iran of course but it could be quite ugly, and in the worse case require a draft, which would be a political disaster. The big question mark in my view is whether we know with confidence where their nuke program is located. If we do, we should take it out regardless, and just brace our forces in Iraq for the off-chance that Iran actually decides to attack in response.
Otherwise, we should plan on an invasion, which no one wants to undertake, but we should plan on it nonetheless, because the alternative will be worse. However, said invasion should be targetted exclusively to the dismantling of the nuclear facilities. If in the course of that the regime falls, then so much the better, but we should not invade with that as an explicit objective or requirement for later withdrawal. That's just my own opinion of things.
Speaking of which, I suspect that Israel will bomb the Iran facilities before the year is out, in which case what we should plan on is just running interference. That's the best case scenario in my view, although it will make Israel's position even tougher than it is, but still far better to what it would be facing a nuclear Iran.
Re: "That's the best case scenario in my view"
Mine: Sanctions...revoltion...and a call for US assistance to secure nuclear facilities. Regime change and WMD security. Hope and pray...
revoltion? WTF!
Sounds revolting to me...
I'm just skeptical that regime change is at all imminent for Iran, and sanctions won't work unless Russia and China are onboard.
A peaceful resolution would of course be the ideal scenario if it were doable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.