Snark: to annoy or irritate

"Snark" has been in English language dictionaries since at least 1906, and Lewis Carroll used the word to describe a mythological animal in his poem, The Hunting of the Snark (1874). Most recently, the word has come to characterize snappish, sarcastic, or mean-spirited comments or actions directed at those who annoy or irritate us.

At first, this blog was just going be a place to gripe, but because it's more satisfying to take action than it is to merely complain, now most of the posts/reposts suggest ways to get involved in solving problems.

There was an error in this gadget

Saturday, August 18, 2012

No War With Iran

 Don't attack IranThere's no good reason for the United States or Israel to bomb Iran in the near future. And a host of prominent American and Israeli defense officials have catalogued a litany of reasons why it would be deeply unwise and counterproductive to do so.1

But that hasn't stopped top Israeli politicians from irresponsibly suggesting that Israel is preparing to launch a unilateral attack in the near future — whether the United States likes it or not.2
The aim of this talk is clear: to push President Obama either into abandoning diplomacy with Iran (which puts us on a path to war) or else publicly breaking with Israel (a move seen as politically damaging in the context of his re-election campaign).3
To his credit, President Obama is clearly not rushing to start another war.
But the Obama administration is under tremendous pressure to abandon diplomacy with Iran and follow a path that would make war inevitable.
Members of Congress — including many Democrats who seem to have learned nothing from the catastrophic mistake and tremendous moral failure that was the war in Iraq — are actively trying to limit President Obama's ability to negotiate with Iran.4
And they are making common cause with warmongers like John Bolton (an ambassador to the United Nations under George W. Bush) who want diplomacy to fail.
In an election year, when many of President Obama's traditional allies are either opposed or highly skeptical of his strategy, President Obama must know that Americans support diplomacy that can prevent an unnecessary war.
This is especially true now that Israeli politicians are seeking to use the presidential election as a vehicle to pressure Obama to adopt a more belligerent foreign policy toward Iran.
The more we can do to demonstrate support in the United States for diplomacy, the more leverage we give to the president to reject the calls for war.
Make no mistake, if Israel attacks Iran, it will set the entire Middle East on fire, send oil prices through the roof and our economy off a cliff, and drag the United States into another costly and unnecessary war.
Those who would welcome a war with Iran are trying to suggest that the window for a diplomatic solution is rapidly closing.
But both American and Israeli intelligence services agree that Iran neither has made a decision to build a nuclear bomb nor currently has the capacity to do so.5 So there is no short-term imperative to wage war.
While there is no easy solution to the challenges we face with Iran, it is imperative that we pursue diplomacy in good faith and give diplomatic solutions the time they need to bear fruit.
President Obama has created the space for a meaningful attempt to resolve this situation diplomatically. We need to speak out to give him the political support to continue down this path.
Tell President Obama: We support diplomacy with Iran, not an unnecessary and costly war. Click the link below to sign the petition:
Thank you for speaking out against war with Iran
Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager 
CREDO Action from Working Assets

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.