Korean Job Discussion Forums

[On the other hand]

mc-jc wrote:

[Leon]

[recessiontime]

Please stop derailing the thread. This is actually a pretty serious and important topic.

[Leon]

Now that I've thought about this a bit more I'm undecided on what Hamas would do. I suspect that Hamas cares just as much about its relations with Israel as it does its relations with Iran. Hamas isn't primarily a terrorist group, anyone who tells you that has been listening to too much propaganda.

" in July 2009, Khaled Meshal, Hamas's Damascus-based political bureau chief, stated Hamas's willingness to cooperate with "a resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict which included a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders," provided that Palestinian refugees be given the right to return to Israel and that East Jerusalem be recognized as the new state's capital.[23][24] Hamas has in the past described its conflict with Israel as political and not religious"

"On April 21, 2008, former US President Jimmy Carter met with Hamas Leader Khaled Meshal and reached an agreement that Hamas would respect the creation of a Palestinian state in the territory seized by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967, provided this be ratified by the Palestinian people in a referendum. Hamas later publicly offered a long-term hudna with Israel if Israel agreed to return to its 1967 borders and to grant the "right of return" to all Palestinian refugees. In November 2008, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, de jure Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority and de facto prime minister in Gaza, stated that Hamas was willing to accept a Palestinian state within the 1949 armistice lines, and offered Israel "a long-term hudna, or truce, if Israel recognized the Palestinians' national rights"

"Hamas devotes up to 90% of its estimated $70 million annual budget to an extensive social services network, running many relief and education programs, and funds schools, orphanages, mosques, healthcare clinics, soup kitchens, and sports leagues. Such services aren't generally provided by The Palestinian Authority. According to the Israeli scholar Reuven Paz "approximately 90 percent of the organization's work is in social, welfare, cultural, and educational activities"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas

I'm not aware of any recent major attacks by Hamas so it might be safe to count them out. Hezbollah would be much more apt to violence, as well as other terrorist groups within Gaza, which by the way Hamas tries to stop, and the West bank. It would also be interesting to see if Syria takes any action or not.

[bucheon bum]

[mc_jc]

Hamas and Hezb'allah were formed because of the vacuum that was created by the lack of social services that was supposed to be provided by the national government. These groups not only provide social and humanitarian services to the people living within their area, but provide security that neither the Lebanese nor the Palestinian Authority.

Although the US and Iran seem at odds over Iran's nuclear program, it can be noted that the Iranian nuclear program dates back to the Shah-era when US technicians and expertise were used to start the reactor project that was only restarted after 1998. Even then, Iranian President Khatami got the blessing from the Clinton administration based on American nuclear inspectors' reports that the program was indeed peaceful and civilian-intended.
However, it was toward the end of his administration, when the Office of the Ayatollah and Guardian Council started to override his policies and preparing for Ahmadinejad to take office, did the nuclear program take a more militant nature.
The US is not really afraid of Iran actually having the weapon, but the risk of sharing that technology with Syria or worse yet, Hezb'allah.

As for military action, M.A.D. is the doctrine- any nation that has nuclear weapons and threatens to use them, the US is obligated to respond to such threats by using nuclear weapons. This is why the international community is trying its hardest to negotiate a freeze to the program.
Also, right now China and Russia are enabling Iran to continue its research under the assumption that it is peaceful and is protected under their security pact. But if Iran announces it has nuclear weapons, it would embarrass Russia and China and will force them to turn their backs on Iran since none of them want to restart the Cold War.

[Reggie]

[mc_jc]

The US has developed safety nets that were put in place after the Oil Embargo of the 1970's.
OPEC was able to start the embargo, but after awhile, it was the oil cartel that really suffered- the US was able to get oil from non-OPEC nations including Mexico, Brazil and even the Soviet Union not to mention the beginning of offshore oil exploration.
If an energy crisis were to happen again, the US would open Alaska to oil exploration as well as stepping up offshore oil drilling (despite the oil slick that occurred in the Gulf). Also, nations wanting to explore for oil would get substantial US investment.
The US would have more than enough oil for domestic consumption and to drive the war effort.

If tensions did escalate to the use of nuclear weapons, the war would last only a month.
As for any terrorist threat due to war, you should thank Reagan for the government's response to it. The US has been building massive internment camps in the southwest since 1986.

[Leon]

[The Happy Warrior]

[mc_jc]