Yes, I know I've poo-pooed the idea of involving Iran and Syria in talks about Iraq, but I've now changed my mind. After listening to the coverage about it on the radio today whilst driving back from oop north I've come to the conclusion that we really should be talking to Iran and Syria.
We should get them around a table and open the talks by telling them slowly and clearly that they must stop fomenting the insurgency immediately, they must desist from sending munitions to the insurgency and they must secure their borders and withdraw all support for the insurgency.
We should tell them that this is their one and only warning - and then we should get up from the table and leave the room.
1 comment:
I thought that when our sailors were taken hostage.
We should have immediately called in the Iranian ambassador and told him Iran had four hours to get them back into our hands. Then dismissed him with a warning time was passing.
Four hours later, when we didn't yet have our people back, we should have nuked a city on Iran's South coast.
We should then have called the Iranian ambassador in and told him Iran had four hours to return them safely into our hands. Then dismissed him with a warning that time was passing.
If we still didn't have them back, then on the four hour mark we should have nuked a city approx half way between that first city and Teheran.
We should then have called in the Iranian ambassador and warned him Iran had four hours ... etc.
If we still didn't have them back ... a city half way between the second city and Teheran. etc.
Does anyone think we'd have reached Teheran?
No threats of what we would do - just the four hour warning, then do it.
Post a Comment