A solution to the Iran problem?

[mdklatt]

You need to have a dictionary handy when you read Christopher Hitchens's stuff, but it's worth it. For those of you who are unfamiliar with him, he supports our involvement in Iraq but has plenty of criticism to level at Bush's foreign policy.

Let the exchange of trade and ideas with Iran begin. (http://www.slate.com/id/2137560/)



So, picture if you will the landing of Air Force One at Imam Khomeini International Airport. The president emerges, reclaims the U.S. Embassy in return for an equivalent in Washington and the un-freezing of Iran's financial assets, and announces that sanctions have been a waste of time and have mainly hurt Iranian civilians. (He need not add that they have also given some clerics monopoly positions in various black markets; the populace already knows this.) A new era is possible, he goes on to say. America and the Shiite world have a common enemy in al-Qaida, just as they had in Slobodan Milosevic, the Taliban, and the Iraqi Baathists. America is home to a large and talented Iranian community. Let the exchange of trade and people and ideas begin!

[SoonerProphet]

Not one to bag on individuals, usually ideas, but Hitchens is a Marxist, so his ideas are usually faulty. I wonder what his opinion is of aiding AQ in sending fighters to Bosnia to kill Serbs.

[mdklatt]

Not one to bag on individuals, usually ideas, but Hitchens is a Marxist, so his ideas are usually faulty.

He's a staunch atheist, but I don't know if I'd call him a Marxist. Or do you mean Marxist as seperate from Communist? I'm not real familiar with him, only what he's written in Slate

Do you have any specific criticisms of this particular idea? Iran may be more ready for democracy than Iraq will ever be if given a nudge.

[SoonerProphet]

He's a staunch atheist, but I don't know if I'd call him a Marxist. Or do you mean Marxist as seperate from Communist? I'm not real familiar with him, only what he's written in Slate

Do you have any specific criticisms of this particular idea? Iran may be more ready for democracy than Iraq will ever be if given a nudge.

I think Christopher Hitchens is very leftist in his political leanings.

I'll agree that engagement with Iran is the best way to go. His comments that SH was crazy and Iraq was a hermetic society, like NK, are way off base. Playing the Shiite angle is apt **** off a few folks as well.

[Octavian]

He's a staunch atheist, but I don't know if I'd call him a Marxist. Or do you mean Marxist as seperate from Communist?

no, no, no! :rolleyes:

there's absolutely NO difference...you're thinkin too much....you went to one of those commie learnin schools, didn't ya??

You make me sick.







;)

[OklahomaTuba]

I've had it with Iran. I think the time to "engage" Iran is over.

They have committed an act of war against us I believe, and should be held accountable. Bush needs to stand up to them now.


March 6, 2006 — U.S. military and intelligence officials tell ABC News that they have caught shipments of deadly new bombs at the Iran-Iraq border.

They are a very nasty piece of business, capable of penetrating U.S. troops' strongest armor.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1692347&page=1

[Jerk]

I don't think you can reason with a bunch of fanatical nut-cases.

[Penguin]

Iran isn't a flat desert where we'll be rolling tanks in formation straight to Tehran. This is going to be like the Balkans or Afgahnistan: bad guys hiding out in every cave.

[Okla-homey]

Kill 'em all. Let Allah sort 'em out.;)

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/3109/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[TUSooner]

But seriously folks.... It takes 2 to talk, and with their nut-job president who can do nothing but foam at the mouth against Israel and Jews, we'll be one short of having enough for a conversation.
OTOH, anybody that thinks we can, at this time. just roll in the tanks and clean out the place needs to put down the pipe and take a little nap. OTOOH, there are probably some people in Iran who would welcome the US. Maybe not as many as, say, 10 years ago, but some.

[SoonerProphet]

As I am sure most are aware, Ahmadinejad doesn't have much real power. What Hitchens and his fellow thinkers always seem to get wrong is the staying power of ethnic nationalism.

[TUSooner]

As I am sure most are aware, Ahmadinejad doesn't have much real power.
True, true. But he was shoehorned in by the grace of the hardliners and stays in the forefront at their pleasure; that tells me he's got some backing for his nazi crap.



What Hitchens and his fellow thinkers always seem to get wrong is the staying power of ethnic nationalism.
In Iran, it's not just Persian nationalism, but also the "usual" religious fundamentalism. Sometimes they work together, sometimes they are at odds. We should have been talking when the previous Iranian pres was in. We might have boosted him by merely acknowledging him, and had more popular support than the current babbler. Then again, as soon as we'd have told him hello, the mullahs might have told him goodbye.

[SoonerProphet]

True, true. But he was shoehorned in by the grace of the hardliners and stays in the forefront at their pleasure; that tells me he's got some backing for his nazi crap.

No doubt, he has the backing of the mullahs. The man was also elected, so he has a political base outside of the mullahs too.



In Iran, it's not just Persian nationalism, but also the "usual" religious fundamentalism. Sometimes they work together, sometimes they are at odds. We should have been talking when the previous Iranian pres was in. We might have boosted him by merely acknowledging him, and had more popular support than the current babbler. Then again, as soon as we'd have told him hello, the mullahs might have told him goodbye.

Or a significant bulk of the Iranian population might have wrote him off as a puppet. Whether we here in the West think poorly of the Islamic Republic or not, it is a model for political Islam, both Shia and Sunni.

[KaiserSooner]

You need to have a dictionary handy when you read Christopher Hitchens's stuff, but it's worth it. For those of you who are unfamiliar with him, he supports our involvement in Iraq but has plenty of criticism to level at Bush's foreign policy.

Let the exchange of trade and ideas with Iran begin. (http://www.slate.com/id/2137560/)

A good read, and one that pretty much reflects what I've been thinking about US-Iran relations for some time, going back to the pre-Ahmadinejad days of Khatami.

Needless to say, it sounds like a good idea and a bold move.

Similarly, I think Cuba should be handled the same. Unfortunately, Cuba is a more personal affair, with both parties whoring themselves to the Cuban-American voters of Florida.

[KaiserSooner]

Whether we here in the West think poorly of the Islamic Republic or not, it is a model for political Islam, both Shia and Sunni.

Totally agree. Though certainly flawed, it has succeeded, to a certain and limited extent, in involving citizens in government.....sort of a low grade, grass roots democratic participation. In that respect, it is eerily reminiscent of Imperial Germany.

On the other hand, our friends in the Middle East may be Saudi Arabia and Egypt, but those regimes, thus far, only serve to exacerbate the social-religious-political-economic problems that plaque their region, and stamp out political participation within their countries.

[mdklatt]

I think Christopher Hitchens is very leftist in his political leanings.

With his pro-war stance regarding Iraq he's about the most conservative political author on Slate. Not that that's hard to do. :D

I got the impression he's a radical moderate, but it sounds like you're more familiar with him than I am.



His comments that SH was crazy and Iraq was a hermetic society, like NK, are way off base.


I agree. Kim Jong Il is just plain crazy, but Saddam was crazy like a fox.

[mdklatt]

I don't think you can reason with a bunch of fanatical nut-cases.

We're not trying to reason with the fanatical nut-cases that rule Iran, but the growing number Iranians who want to engage with the West. I have long heard that Iran was ripe for a democratic revolution. Of course, we were told that about Iraq, too, and it hasn't panned out yet. One thing that Iran has going for it is that it's much more ethnically and religiously homoegeneous that Iraq so you wouldn't have all the sectarian violence. Plus, Iran already has a history of democracy. All they would have to do is ditch the ayotollahs and the rest of the government could stay the same.

[OklahomaTuba]

Whether we here in the West think poorly of the Islamic Republic or not, it is a model for political Islam, both Shia and Sunni.
Amazing. Calling Iran a "model" is near laughable.

This so called "model" is nothing more than the same thing as pre-war Iraq and Syria, they just happen to have a president for show. The only difference between Iran and Syria and Baathist Iraq is the clothing the big man wears.

I think the only solution to this is no boots on the ground, but just neutering them with a dozen or so of these:
http://es.geocities.com/scuadrafotos/B-2-6.jpg

One B-2 payload of smart bombs can hit 80 individual targets. I think this is the way to go.

[Jerk]

I think Israel will strike first with one of their Dolphin class subs using a cruise missle tipped with a nuke.

We need odds from Vegas so we can place bets.

[KaiserSooner]

Comparing Iran to Syria and Iraq is like comparing the UK to the USSR.

[OklahomaTuba]

Comparing Iran to Syria and Iraq is like comparing the UK to the USSR.

Hmm, I wonder which one is the UK?

Last time I checked, the UK wasn't a terrorist supporting fundamentalist dictatorship based on Shira law threatening to blow other countries off the face of the earth.

I guess that means Syria would be the UK in Kaiserworld.

[KaiserSooner]

Syria is and Saddam's Iraq was pan-Arab socialist, secular dictatorships. Iran is a theocracy with the functional trappings of democracy. In other words, apples and oranges.

[OklahomaTuba]

Syria is and Saddam's Iraq was pan-Arab socialist, secular dictatorships. Iran is a theocracy with the functional trappings of democracy. In other words, apples and oranges.

Ahh, the trappings of democarcy. A model we should all be following no doubt.

Saddam had the trappings of democracy as well. He never lost an election either.

Same goes with the chinless eye doctor in Syria.

Its all the same fruit man. One dictator wears a robe, the other wears a suit.