

The cads! The fact that this is precisely what the US was up to of
course is not mentioned. It is a fact that Regan and Bush sold arms
to Iran, it is also a fact that they supported and armed Iraq.

Still this is state dept propaganda so none too surprizing.


In the case of Lybia there is the problem that the US only decided
that Gadffii ordered the bombing after it needed to make peace with
damascus during the gulf war. One day the US is certain that its Syria,
the next Lybia. For a strange reason the US will not provide evidence to
Lybian courts for extradition proceedings. Faced with similar demands the
USA would reject them as would any other country.



The word is "terrorism".


The problem is that after the behaviour of George Bush the USA has an
image abroad as doing precisely what it likes and is in its own interests
then comming out with a Dysney scripted sugary justification repeating a
fitting combination of the words "freedom" "dignity" "democaracy" or
of "terrorism" "dictatorship" etc as appropriate.

The USA could go quite far to mend the bridges with  Iran. The people there are
rather pissed off because the USA first supported the Shah who they
loathed and then supported Saddam when he mounted an unprovoked attack. 
Hardly surprizing after the embassy hostage crisis but Iran is meant to be
the country run by unreasonable bigots not the USA so if there is to be
movement it would be easier for the USA to move.

First off they could recognise Iraqu's responsibility in initiating the
Iran/Iraq war. Providing technical assistance to Iran to get it's oil
production back up to capacity would also be a smart move, at the moment 
Iran is above it's OPEC ceiling. If they had extra capacity they would
use it and bring down the oild price further which is in our interests.

The Iranian clerics would have an interest in seeking a raprochment 
simply because a permanent war footing is debilitating. They also need
western technology. 
