Perhaps, there are cracks developing in Festung Washington, D.C. and the reign of George Bush.
Reports are that deep divisions are hampering efforts to develop a cohesive policy towards Iran's nuclear program. Some even claim it is Iran's nuclear threat.
Some members of the Bush administration want a strong confrontation with Iran (prelude to war). Others believe that there are a number of issues to address with Iran rather than focusing solely on just the nuclear issue.
The second part of the equation is to get America’s allies to buy into a position which is going to be rather hard considering that in spite of US assurances, no WMD were found in Iraq. US creditability is shaky at best.
Iran’s tougher than nails opposition to the United States traces its roots back to the installation of the Shaw of Iran by the US. The former dictator used his secret police to kill what he thought were enemies of the state, and the secret police did so with brutal efficiency. Instead of bring democracy to Iran, we handed them a dictator.
Iran has made it known that it wants to settle the score and Iran having a nuclear program is causing distress on capital hill. Washington is now facing the grim reality of its own foreign policies and actions.
American hardliners want decisive military action which means invasion. European countries which in the past have taken sides with, or at least partial sides with, the US, are reluctant to go along with anything such as military intervention as they enjoy strong business ties with Iran.
European countries are deeply suspicious of the Bush administration's intentions toward Iran. And more than one person has suggested Bush’s agenda is about capturing oil rich countries. Considering America cars are getting bigger and guzzling more gas, it would make sense that Bush would want to help his business friendly pals to get their lion’s share of oil under the guise of protecting America and spreading capitalism.
Francois Heisbourg, director of the Paris-based Foundation for Strategic Research, also adds that there is another problem that adds into European suspicions and that is "if only because these countries believe the U.S. may not actually want what it says it wants". In diplomatic language people believe that the US is not being truthful about its agendas.
Some White House officials insist that the administration is united on the immediate need to work with European allies to head off Iran's nuclear weapons production through diplomacy. This is where the internal conflicts are happening. One side screaming for war, the other side demanding diplomacy. There is a third opinion and that is that the US does not have a cohesive foreign policy and lacking direction.
It would appear that with a military presence already in the Middle East that Bush will opt for war. Bush has acknowledged he is a war president.
It has long been understood that the West has been trying to subject Russian borders to total control. We have not seen such activity even during the Cold War
The co-author of this disaster is the Dutch government, which did not find either strength or desire to save the lives of its citizens who were flying on that plane. The Dutch authorities did not demand Ukraine to comply with international aviation regulations