Think [the box] ing discussion

6 Signs the U.S. May Be Headed for War in Iran

With the US having wanted to attack Iran for some time, there are those who fear that liklihood may becoming more imminent, as postulated in the above link.

Do you think it is wise to have an aggressive foreign policy? One such as that of the USA which has resulted in so many wars and deaths.

One interesting and concerning point is that although the US has been acting as if it is at war in or with so many nations, it has only formally declared war 5 times, the last being in WWII. However 7/6 years later the US is still essentially waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

It appears that US Presidents have taken military action, not authorised by Congress , 125 times...

Why is it not a wise policy to not have "entangling alliances". Why do some countries get away with spending so much of its citizens money on killing other people and its own people?

Would you support the US waging "military intervention" (lets be straight here - it means murdering people and destroying lives) in and against Iran?

What would your ideal policy be in regards to foreign relations?

I must say that i am continuing to be impressed with Mr Rudd since he ousted the little worm Howard. It is encouraging that Australia may be getting to a place that i respect it. The UK would do well to follow its example of unentangling itself from the USA.

"Rudd's troop withdrawal leaves Bush alone on Iraq"

I know we have a couple of fine Aussies ;) here, what are your thoughts on Rudd's policy changes, both locally and indeed in terms of international policy?

I'm still impressed by Rudd too, despite the fact that his "working families" rhetoric/verbal crutch grates on my nerves like nothing else. But, I voted for him and watched the entire election with heart-warming glee as Howard lost not only the federal election but his own seat!.

I think he does represent a big change in the way that this country will conduct its foreign affairs, though. The Iraq withdrawal is just one example, albeit a gutsy one that I personally am extremely thankful for, but I think Rudd's focus on dialogue signals a different way of approaching international relations.

Domestically speaking, he has copped a fair bit of criticism lately for his penchant for bureaucracy and "talk-fests". We had a big ideas summit a couple of weekends ago (the 2020 summit), wherein notable representatives (nominated by the government..) congregated together to decide what the future of Australia ought to be. There was the inevitable backlash, with this being just another bureaucratic, administrative excess, what good is talking, blah blah.

But for what it's worth, I have a lot of respect for Rudd and the focus on ideas and debate that he has thus far showed. Regardless of how staged, the fact that there was a summit with the express intention of deciding what the key issues facing the country are, is something I consider extremely important and valuable. In order to combat any social problems, you first have to agree on what they -are-, something which is often taken for granted. U

That's all probably a bit off topic, and absolutely nothing to do with Iran..

Things do appear headed in that direction. With AQI defeated as a military threat to the Iraqi Govt, the war's center of gravity has now switched to Tehran, and it's IRGC and Hezbollah proxies. If the US truly wishes to be successful in Iraq, strategies and tactics will need to change to better address the situation.