Originally Posted by dorfman24
I think I have - repeatedly - used that sardonic tone when I thought someone was offering opinion without explanation or justification or merely being an ass. And I think you know well my thoughts on Ahmedinejad and his regime. And I don't think my post injected hyperbole, merely an astonished reaction to what I would consider an extreme position.
But, to answer your specific question, yes, I think FTL's post is in error in that it casts Bush as the dangerous belligerant and Iran as a peaceful and careful defender of its endangerd people. In my opinion this is an extreme view that does not take into account Iran's human rights record toward its own people, its behavior in relation to the U.N., its flagrant disregard for the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, it's repeated verbal threats to Israel and its history of illegal hostage taking which has violated our embassy and a ship of the British fleet operating in Iraqi waters.
I think you may have misinterpreted some of FTL's characterization of the Iranian leader - I do not believe FTL ever said the guy was a peaceful and careful defender of the endangered Iranian people. I think we are all aware that the man is not an ideal leader and has taken his country down a dangerous path of confrontation with the international community on the nuclear issue.
I think the issue at hand was the portrayal of Mr. DinnerJacket and Mr. Bush as essentially equals, with Mr. Bush having a hell of a lot more behind his threats than the DinnerJacket and therefore being more dangerous. Your arguing method was to show how the white hat just doesn't fit on the DinnerJacket. No one said either deserved a white hat. They are both negative influences on world peace and prosperity, with Bush capable of wreaking orders of magntitude greater havoc on the world.
Is he likely to do that? Well, the short answer is "yes." Given how we got into Iraq, why we went in, and what we did to prepare for the "mission," the continuing aggressive rhetoric, failure to engage the Iranians directly in negotiations, the generally poor relations we have with most of the nations in the rest of the world leaving us isolated I think the Bush model is not positive for concluding we will have no further bungled military actions in the Middle East. When I look at the DinnerJacket record, I see no similar rhetoric followed by bungled military actions. So, I would have to conclude they are both obnoxious to listen to, however, Bush is more likely to do something unwarranted and bungle it than the DinnerJacket. Jim