I found this article on the New York Times today and I must say its probably my favorite article that I have read yet during this new blogging experience. The article dealt with a United States simulation of a possible attack on Iran by the Israelis and then for told how the United States would be impacted and then in turn get involved.
The simulation caused for U.S involvement due to some kind of predicted attack by Iran due to the initial attack by Israel. It was said that it would come in the form of an attack on a vessel that would be located around the Persian territory. It even simulated the amount of Americans that would be killed. Further on in the simulation, it showed that Iran would slowly pursue retaliation due to their fears of total American involvement. Basically, it ended with the U.S. becoming involved and losing several thousands of lives. It would turn from a 2 nation matter to a wider regional problem.
The part that I found most appealing about this article was that the author for the first time gave no severe bias or showed his take on the matter. He even made it notable that these simulations can never prove anything. I always thought it was a bit out of hand when you say you can predict the way a human being will act especially when there are heated emotions involved. The author presented the information in a way that made him neither sound concerned nor sound ignorant or not interested in the matter. I felt that it was well reported and the political news like this needs to be more evident in my standpoint even during times of campaign. It would cause more people to push to get involved in the campaigns/elections due them wanting to see different viewpoints on matters such as these.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/20/world/middleeast/united-states-war-game-sees-dire-results-of-an-israeli-attack-on-iran.html?pagewanted=1&hp
No comments:
Post a Comment