"In the 27 years since the Iranian Revolution, the United States has launched air strikes on Libya, invaded Grenada, put Marines in Lebanon and run air strikes in the Bekaa Valley and Chouf Mountains in retaliation for the Beirut bombing.We invaded Panama, launched Desert Storm to liberate Kuwait and put troops into Somalia. Under Clinton, we occupied Haiti, fired cruise missiles into Sudan, intervened in Bosnia, conducted bombing strikes on Iraq and launched a 78-day bombing campaign against Serbia, a nation that never attacked us. Then, we put troops into Kosovo.
After the Soviet Union stood down in Eastern Europe, we moved NATO into Poland and the Baltic states and established U.S. bases in former provinces of Russia's in Central Asia.
Under Bush II, we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, though it appears Saddam
neither had weapons of mass destruction nor played a role in 9-11.
Yet, in this same quarter century when the U.S. military has been so busy it
is said to be overstretched and exhausted, Iran has invaded not one
neighbor and fought but one war: an 8-year war with Iraq where she was
the victim of aggression. And in that war of aggression against Iran,
we supported the aggressor.
Hence, when Iran says that even as we have grievances against her, she has
grievances against us, does Iran not have at least a small point?"
I don't always agree with Pat Buchanan, but I do have a great respect for him and I think he would have been a much better president than Bush II... Buchanan could have carried Reagan's mantle. And don't think our borders would only be dealt with now, almost 5 years after 9/11. Kudos to Buchanan for seeing both sides of the Iran issue, something Bush II has been unable to do.