太陽のコメント アメリカ政府内部の綱引きの情報です。 このままイラク戦争でじり貧になれば、支持率も低下しているブッシュ大統領は、かねての核爆発の計画を実行せざるをえなくなるのではとおもっています。 今日で噂の「血の八月」は　終わりますが、もし予想された出来事が無かったとしても、九月十月と進むに従って必然的に可能性は増加していきそうです。 下記はその論文のようです。 原文もつけてあります。

米国は、対イラク戦争に敗北しつつあるが、ネオコン＝シオニスト・イスラエルは米国に更に戦争を対イラン戦争へ拡大要求。 http://www.asyura2.com/0505/war73/msg/940.html 投稿者 救国の草莽の志士 日時 2005 年 8 月 31 日 00:03:07: fzrYJ5Wj4Dt36 「米国は、対イラク戦争に敗北しつつある」と。 しかし、ネオコン＝シオニストイスラエルは、米国に対して、さらに戦争を、対イラン戦争へとエスカレートすることを要求する。 （週刊日本新聞　時事寸評より転載） 更新 平成17年08月30日08時28分 平成十七年（二〇〇五年）八月二十九日（月） （第一千四百十六回） ○イマヌエル・ウォーラスタイン　Immanuel Wallerstein　二〇〇五年八月十五日。 ○この短い論説は、「米国は対イラク戦争を失った」“The U.S. Has Lost the Iraq War”と題されて居る。 ○ここに、「Lost」とあるところは、「敗北した」、と言うよりは、「勝つ見込みがない」と「敗北」の中間ぐらいか。 ○米国がイラク戦争に勝利するためには、三つの条件が必要とされる。 即ち、 　（１）イラク人の抵抗を敗北させる。 　（２）イラクに、親米的な安定した政府を確立する。 　（３）米国人民の対イラク戦争への支持を維持する。 　「しかし、これら三条件のいずれも、もはや、不可能である」と。 ○この評価は、しごく常識的なところであろう。 ○米国は、戦争党（ウォーパーティ）と、イラクからの撤退を要求する陣営とに、 分裂した、と。 ○この評価も、ごくあたり前だ。 ○しかし、それでどうするのか。 ○「ウォーパーティ（戦争党）」とは、いわゆるネオコン派と全く一致する。 ○そして、このウォーパーティ＝ネオコンは、イスラエルの右翼政権の別動隊、又は代理人である。 ○「米国のネオコン＝戦争党＝イスラエルタカ派陣営」は、 イスラムテロリストによる米国本土への核攻撃を演出し、そしてそれを口実にして、ただちに、イランの五百前後の標的に対するミサイル核兵器及び通常兵器による攻撃を実施したい。 ○しかし、そんなことが実行出来たとして、それからどう成るのだ。 ○かなりの数の米軍高官が、この対イラン戦争に反対して居ると言う。 ○それは、彼らが、「平和主義者」、「反戦主義者」であるからではない。 ○そのあとの合理的な軍事的な展望が立てられない、と言うのであろう。 ○核ミサイルでイランの一部を壊滅させたとしても、 結局、米軍は、陸軍をイランに派遣しなければならない。 ○一体、どのくらいの規模の陸軍を、いかなる任務のもとに、イランに派遣するつもりなのか。 ○イスラエル政府としては、米国がイランを核ミサイルでたたき潰したのち、 パレスチナ人に対する全面戦争に、踏み切るつもりであろう。 ○つまり、パレスチナ人のほとんどを、強制的に、国外に追放するのである。 ○しかるのち、エルサレムで、岩のドームを破壊し、そのあとに、第三ソロモン神殿を建設する計画だ。 ○これは、第三次全面核世界大戦へと、一歩一歩、近付いて行くことを意味する。 ○日本はどう成るのか、国賊小泉に引きずられて、一億二千万日本人は、何の考えもなしに、かくの如く、第三次全面核世界大戦の戦場のドマン中に、猛烈な速度で走って行く。

The U.S. Has Lost the Iraq War 　by Immanuel Wallerstein　 http://www.asyura2.com/0505/war73/ msg/943.html 投稿者 愛国心を主張する者ほど売国奴 日時 2005 年 8 月 31 日 01:23:31: tTp1/cyvuKUmU (回答先: 米国は、対イラク戦争に敗北しつつあるが、ネオコン＝シオニスト・イスラエルは米国に更に戦争を対イラン戦争へ拡大要求。 投稿者 救国の草莽の志士 日時 2005 年 8 月 31 日 00:03:07) Commentary No. 167, Aug. 15, 2005 "The U.S. Has Lost the Iraq War" It's over. For the U.S. to win the Iraq war requires three things: defeating the Iraqi resistance; establishing a stable government in Iraq that is friendly to the U.S.; maintaining the support of the American people while the first two are being done. None of these three seem any longer possible. First, the U.S. military itself no longer believes it can defeat the resistance. Secondly, the likelihood that the Iraqi politicians can agree on a constitution is almost nil, and therefore the likelihood of a minimally stable central government is almost nil. Thirdly, the U.S. public is turning against the war because it sees no "light at the end of the tunnel." As a result, the Bush regime is in an impossible position. It would like to withdraw in a dignified manner, asserting some semblance of victory. But, if it tries to do this, it will face ferocious anger and deception on the part of the war party at home. And if it does not, it will face ferocious anger on the part of the withdrawal party. It will end up satisfying neither, lose face precipitously, and be remembered in ignominy. Let us see what is happening. This month, Gen. George Casey, the U.S. commanding general in Iraq, suggested that it may be possible to reduce U.S. troops in Iraq next year by 30,000, given improvements in the ability of the Iraqi government's armed forces to handle the situation. Almost immediately, this position came under attack from the war party, and the Pentagon amended this statement to suggest that maybe this wouldn't happen, since maybe the Iraqi forces were not yet ready to handle the situation, which is surely so. At the same time, stories appeared in the leading newspapers suggesting that the level of military sophistication of the insurgent forces has been growing steadily and remarkably. And the increased rate of killings of U.S. soldiers certainly bears this out. In the debate on the Iraqi constitution, there are two major problems. One is the degree to which the constitution will institutionalize Islamic law. It is conceivable that, given enough time and trust, there could be a compromise on this issue that would more or less satisfy most sides. But the second issue is more intractable. The Kurds, who still really want an independent state, will not settle for less than a federal structure that will guarantee their autonomy, the maintenance of their militia, and control of Kirkuk as their capital and its oil resources as their booty. The Shiites are currently divided between those who feel like the Kurds and want a federal structure, and those who prefer a strong central government provided they can control it and its resources, and provided that it will have an Islamic flavor. And the Sunnis are desperate to maintain a united state, one in which they will minimally get their fair share, and certainly don't want a state governed by Shia interpretations of Islam. The U.S. has been trying to encourage some compromise, but it is hard to see what this might be. So, two possibilities are before us right now. The Iraqis paper over the differences in some way that will not last long. Or there is a more immediate breakdown in negotiations. Neither of these meets the needs of the U.S. Of course, there is one solution that might end the deadlock. The Iraqi politicians could join the resisters in a nationalist anti-American thrust, and thereby unite at least the non-Kurd part of the population. This development is not to be ruled out, and of course is a nightmare from the U.S. point of view. But, for the Bush regime, the worst picture of all is on the home front. Approval rating of Bush for the conduct of the Iraqi war has gone down to 36 percent. The figures have been going steadily down for some time and should continue to do so. For poor George Bush is now faced with the vigil of Cindy Sheehan. She is a 48-year-old mother of a soldier who was killed in Iraq a year ago. Incensed by Bush's statement that the U.S. soldiers died in a "noble cause," she decided to go to Crawford, Texas, and ask to see the president so that he could explain to her for what "noble cause" her son died. Of course, George W. Bush hasn't had the courage to see her. He sent out emissaries. She said this wasn't enough, that she wanted to see Bush personally. She has now said that she will maintain a vigil outside Bush's home until either he sees her or she is arrested. At first, the press ignored her. But now, other mothers of soldiers in Iraq have come to join her. She is getting moral support from more and more people who had previously supported the war. And the national press now has turned her into a major celebrity, some comparing her to Rosa Parks, the Black woman whose refusal to move to the back of the bus in Montgomery, Alabama a half-century ago was the spark that transformed the struggle for Black rights into a mainstream cause. Bush won't see her because he knows there is nothing that he can say to her. Seeing her is a losing proposition. But so is not seeing her. The pressure to withdraw from Iraq is now becoming mainstream. It is not because the U.S. public shares the view that the U.S. is an imperialist power in Iraq. It is because there seems to be no light at the end of the tunnel. Or rather there is a light, the light an acerbic Canadian cartoonist for the Calgary Sun drew recently. He shows a U.S. soldier in a dark tunnel approaching someone to whose body is attached an array of explosives. The light comes from the match he is holding to the wick that will cause them to explode. In the month following the attacks in London and the high level of U.S. deaths in Iraq, this is the light that the U.S. public is beginning to see. They want out. Bush is caught in an insoluble dilemma. The war is lost. by Immanuel Wallerstein [Copyright by Immanuel Wallerstein. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to download, forward electronically or e-mail to others and to post this text on non-commercial community Internet sites, provided the essay remains intact and the copyright note is displayed. To translate this text, publish it in printed and/or other forms, including commercial Internet sites and excerpts, contact the author at immanuel.wallerstein@yale.edu; fax: 1-203-432-6976. These commentaries, published twice monthly, are intended to be reflections on the contemporary world scene, as seen from the perspective not of the immediate headlines but of the long term.] http://fbc.binghamton.edu/167en.htm

そろそろ結婚適齢期？？？ 過払い金の回収ならこちら 過払い金の回収ならこちら