Fri | Jun 25, 2021

Attacking Iran may have grave consequences

Published:Saturday | March 24, 2012 | 12:00 AM

THE EDITOR, Sir:

In response to Ian Boyne's column 'The case against striking Iran' (The Sunday Gleaner, MArch 18, 2012), it seems there are a number of frivolous cabals, especially in Israel, and the trumpeting of war. This, therefore, gives strength to executing their modus operandi of pre-emptive war under the guise of preventing same. How ridiculous!! This is cause for concern for the entire world.

Does the United States (US) ever consider the consequence of a pre-emptive strike on Iran or any other country? The most cogent question is, would it create a more peaceful Middle East?

Are we to believe that the Iranians are more liable to start a nuclear war than the two greatest warmonger countries on the face of earth, the US and Israel, the former being the only country ever to use a nuclear bomb against another nation?

What of the world economy, as it relates to the supply of oil through its aorta bloodline, the Strait of Hormuz? No amount of strong-arm patrolling in such a scenario will ever prevent a world oil-price catastrophe.

The US depends on the Middle East for a vast amount of its oil.

What would be the US exit strategy? Did the US not learn from its last sojourn into Iraq and Afghanistan?

The path taken so far by US President Barack Obama is a most responsible and sensitive one, but will Israel follow suit?

A. MCLEAN

altimc@comcast.net

Connecticut, USA