Q: What's the diff. between the U.S. "meddling" in Iraq and Iran "meddling" in Iraq?

[blitzen]

A: About 150,000 or so civilian deaths.


And, on a somewhat more serious note: Who the hell has a more legitimate right to "meddle" ? A neighboring nation with cultural, ethnic, and religious ties to Iraq, and which for much of the past 1500 years (and especially during it's "golden age") has formed, with Iraq, a single polity? Or a far-away colonialist superpower which doesn't know the difference between "Iraq" and a "hard place"?

[Eurobabe]

1. Example of the Bush Doctrine of Double-Standards

plain and simple. Do as I say, not as I do.

[Erika]

2. W wants the oil for his buds and might makes right

That about sums it up. You don't believe it? W will send in a military surge.

[Emit]

3. Michael Ledeen sums it up here

But above all, the clever stratagem adopted by the administration ignores Machiavelli's greatest lesson: Leadership is all about winning and losing, not about elegance and deep thinking. If we win the Europeans and lose the Middle East, we will have lost. But if we win the Middle East, the Europeans will hail us, as we see from their grudging tributes to Bush's successful liberation of Afghanistan and Iraq. "If you are victorious," Machiavelli says in his uncompromising way, "people will always judge the means you used to have been appropriate."

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michael/ledeen.html

And Robert Parry sheds some reality on the concept:

For a government that wraps its actions in moral absolutes about good versus evil, while deriding liberal relativism, the Bush administration may rank as the most committed in modern American history to an ends-justify-the-means ethos.

Indeed, to understand the administration’s neoconservative foreign policy, one must recognize how this moral framework works: First, it sets out worthy-sounding goals – freedom, democracy, security – and then it applies whatever tactics are deemed necessary – torture, murder, unprovoked invasions – along with an aggressive propaganda strategy at home.

http://consortiumnews.com/2005/030305.html

It's the 'Machiavellian Neoconservative marries Military Industrial Complex' philosophy.

[Kiouni]

4. the U.S. spells it "Medlen" n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Gee you need to ask?

When we do it, well it is to advance democracy

When they do it, it is to advance religious extremism

:sarcasm:

Straight from Rush Limbaugh;s talking points desk

;-)

But I am sure that would be the answer

[bananarepublican]

6. And don't forget who supplied Osama with Stinger missiles for use against the Russians in...

... Afghanistan!

Hypocrisy oozes from every pore of every member of the right-wing-freak-show currently running the country.

[Egalitarian]

7. OK

To my father it's huge: Nuke Iran. Don't ask first.

To my mother it's there: Well. I don't like it either, but I'd rather fight them over there. Get UN resolution "condemning Iran" for some "failure" first.

To my sister it's small. Get unanimous UN approval for military action.

My neighbor to the north. Get the fuck out of the UN. If Iran hits us, vaporize them.

Neighbor to the South. We should only go as a true coalition of the willing. We can't afford another Iraq type FUBAR.

My boss. Yeah, I see what your're saying. Humans are fucking wild, eh?

Me. Fuck yes there's a huge difference. We've got not right to be there under any law that I've heard of. It's military enforced imperialism, just like the history books from 3rd grade.

[sinkingfeeling]

8. Same differences as Iraq invading Kuwait and the US invading Iraq!,

One has the US, 'only superpower in the world' involved and the other does not.

[Emit]

9. More Machiavellian advice from Ledeen

The president would do well to remember Machiavelli’s advice to the prince: If you must inflict pain, it is best to do it all at once, and not try to mitigate it or do it bit by bit. The latter method always makes things worse, and ultimately requires greater violence, and more pain. Or, worse still, your defeat.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjAxYTI2ZWI4MGViODM2MmExZWUzNjMzOWY4ZGM5YTI=

[Emit]

10. More "lesser of two evils" crap from Ledeen

Sorry, I can't resist.

“Machiavelli…has not lost his democratic faith. His call for a brief period of iron rule is a choice of the lesser of two evils: if the corruption continued, a real tyranny would be just a matter of time (making it even harder to restore free institutions), whereas freedom can be preserved if a good man can be found to put the state back in order. Just as it is sometimes necessary temporarily to resort to evil actions to achieve worthy objectives, so a period of dictatorship is sometimes the only hope for freedom.” (p. 174)

http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/MichaelLedeen.html