Something of interest on Iran

Machette · **Something of interest on Iran -** 04-20-2006, 08:37 PM

This doesn't suprise me really, reading this over I thought I read it before last year..but oh well. Hope this sheds light on the coming crisis, if you will..

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archiv ... 008657.php

c312 · 04-20-2006, 09:18 PM

hindsight is 20/20. Even if we had started negotiations with Iran, would they have not elected their "wing nut" president? Unlikely. Would they have abandoned their hatred for America and Israel? Definately not the latter, almost certainly not the former. So then you have to ask yourself, what would it have really done besides given us a little more time to work all this out? What is behind their attempt to get nukes that talking earlier would have solved?

Machette · 04-21-2006, 09:49 AM

So your saying talks could not resolve anything? oOo: Something could have come to a resolution in which would have increased diplomatic talks..Personally I believe from what I've read on certain think tanks (Brookings institute, Council on Foreign Relations, Carnegie Endowment) That if you had not invaded Iraq, had no bases in certain middle east countries then the Iranians wouldn't be scared shitless of being invaded thus not building a nuclear bomb. That's my view shared with many others. And Iran, as of now, is just engaging in a highly hyperbolic game which is being horribly covered by the media. Everyone turns to Mossad (Israel Intelligence) for their intelligence, which over stated Iraq WMD capabilities and is known to be highly anti-arab. So you can look at these events or look at the president's advice who as of now has one of the worst reputations ever. I somehow feel that the coup in the 50's, if it had not occurred maybe Arab states would actually like you guys.

c312 · 04-21-2006, 10:25 AM

well, the fact is they don't, they hate us, and I don't think you can negotiate with people who want to destroy your country and your values, but that might just be me.

Machette · 04-21-2006, 11:08 AM

This was before the crazy president was elected, diplomatic talks could have resumed even with the current president..unless he pulled out or bush did. Like I said resentment as Stephen Kinzer details in his brilliant book "Overthrow" and "All the shah's men" may not even exist if you didn't stir up islam in the 50's. Some believe democracy would have acutally flourished if you left the PM of Iran alone.

Also saying you can't deal with a mad man is absurd. He doesn't speak for all of Iran, he acutally just barely won the run off election. It's not like all his advisors and diplomats are like him. The object of diplomacy is to resolve issues no matter how "insane" you see the other country. Look at the Cold War, we would all be dead if the U.S and USSR didn't talk.

c312 · 04-21-2006, 02:14 PM

I don't care what happened in the past, but the truth is, at the moment, most of the middle east hates us. If you think we can negotiate with them, fine, maybe we can. I dont' think it will work unless we put pressure on them from multiple countries.

Machette · 04-21-2006, 02:39 PM

I'm speechless...did the USSR not hate America?

The middle east is a different country, yes, in another time, of course. However if they hate you alot or not..TALKING is more important than action. I would hate to see another Iraq situation..but most of the hawks are going all out on this issue. Going around diplomacy is not a issue. Having another preemptive war, in my opinion, is a grave mistake.

c312 · 04-21-2006, 04:14 PM

no, the USSR did not hate america. They wanted to beat America and be more powerful, but they didn't have a deep felt hatred for all Americans as so many middle eastern countries do. I think you are too worried about the United States invading Iran. If anyone invades Iran, it will most likely be condoned by the UN or with a consensus of developed nations. This is not like Iraq, other countries are already taking up the issue.

Machette · 04-21-2006, 05:38 PM

Yeah the UN did alot with Iraq. oOo:

c312 · 04-21-2006, 06:08 PM

true, but this is a different case

Tripper · 04-21-2006, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by c312

I don't care what happened in the past, but the truth is, at the moment, most of the middle east hates us. If you think we can negotiate with them, fine, maybe we can. I dont' think it will work unless we put pressure on them from multiple countries.

Yeah your gov. fucked that up - You could have probably negotiated before Iraq, but the U.S lost alot of credibility in the eyes of the general middle eastern population after the way that campaign was handled.

Machette · 04-21-2006, 06:49 PM

Or its overall foreign policy standard in the past. You guys just can't stop fucking up.

Coleman · 04-21-2006, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Machette

Or its overall foreign policy standard in the past. You guys just can't stop fucking up.

If everything was a great world, I would love to have the US step down from policing the world. But you can't have Canadians do it which leaves the US for the responsibility.

Machette · 04-21-2006, 09:01 PM

Yes because you guys have done such a mighty fine job! I take a realist approach in my foreign policy not this neo con go get em policy. The only persons "policing" the world should be the U.N (after intense reform) They have the obligation not the U.S.

Machette · 04-22-2006, 05:32 PM

http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/444

rock: