Victor Davis Hanson, in an interview with Hugh Hewitt;
HH: That’s what…I want to come back to that, but I do want to pause for a moment. The Reuters report, and my suspicion is most mainstream media tomorrow will report this without any pejorative attached to the length of the letter. In fact, the Reuters report begins, “Iran’s president sent an unprecedented letter to President George W. Bush on Monday, suggesting ways to ease tension over Tehran’s nuclear program. But skeptical U.S. officials said it may be a political ploy…”
VDH: Yeah, look at the language there.
HH: Isn’t that amazing?
VDH: Skeptical, ploy. So a man does something unprecedented, and writes a rambling, 18 page letter, and those who don’t take it at face value are called skeptical, and this is dubbed a ploy, and disparaging our own. We’ve been there with these people before when Bill Clinton apologized for the Shah. He said that the Iranian democracy was the most liberal in his mind. He went to Davos, Switzerland a year ago, and fell all over himself to appease these people. And it doesn’t lead to anything as long as that government’s in power.
VDH says we have about a year to eighteen months before Iran has nuclear weapons.
May I request the appeasers and intellectuals hustle up and create a solution before this happens. No matter what GW Bush does, it will be wrong, in their view, so let’s hear from our intellectual superiors, especially Noam Chomsky, Michael Ignatieff, Al and Bill Clinton-Gore, Michael Moore, etc.
Meanwhile, GW Bush should make very sure Israel’s nukes are well oiled and ready, just in case our “Betters” fail us.
C’mon you geniuses, show us your stuff!
I wonder if Isreal is reduced to a smoking hole, will the nay sayers be shocked and disgusted with their own inaction, or shrug their shoulders and say finally we’ll have peace in the ME?
dmorris, good post.
I have no doubt at all that Israel will take care of this problem. I would guess it will be sooner rather than later.
Israel does not have a history of dithering while their very existence is at stake.
One wonders when the Palestinians are going to look at a map.
Good point kate,
Trouble is, after looking at the map, one would have to apply some logic.
Seems to be a bit of a stretch.
The Americans have frozen out Iran since 1979. How is that policy working for them? I suspect its working as well as their freeze out of Castro’s Cuba.
I think if you want to solve a problem you have to find ways to engage the problem not avoid it.
Many countries refuse to be bullied economically or militarily. It is time the USA found a third way to deal with nations that refuse to roll over when commanded to do so.
In response to Steve D.
I don’t see how unfreezing the Iranians would contribute meaningfully. After all, Tehran has orchestrated terrorist attacks and funded various organizations since 1979. Castro is a dictator and a tyrant. Why talk to them? Refusing to talk is not bullying, it is common sense.
If my next door neighbor beats his wife, I’ll call the police. If the police do nothing, and if I were more cowboyish, I’d take the law into my own hands. If other neighbors restrain me from going unilateral, I suppose I’d just refuse to deal with the bully.
Canada hasn’t actually managed to change the behavior of Cuba either and most Canadians actually love Castro.
Canada hasn’t actually managed to change the behavior of the Iranians either, and when they kill on of our own, they laugh because they know we won’t do a damn thing.
Bait the hook; hook; caught.
In Canadian history, the finest example, IIRC, was the Stanfield/Trudeau game, where Stanfield temporized giving Trudeau the victory; defeat for Stanfield; Trudeau hooked and caught Stanfield, netted him, landed him; trophy for Machiavelli/Trudeau.
Israel will not temporize; not when its survival is the trophy. Israel will pull down the temple of the mad mullahs onto the mullahs’ heads. …
Temporizing
André Aciman
Excerpt:
Following the disastrous defeat of Roman troops at Cannae–one of the bloodiest battles in ancient history–Fabius’s dilatory strategy of dogging the enemy without ever confronting him in Italy proved successful in wearing down Hannibal’s forces, ultimately making possible Scipio’s bolder move which put an end to the Second Punic War with the invasion of Carthage. Until this very day, Fabius Maximus is known in most schoolbooks as the temporizer–the more usual translation of cunctator–which means:
he who waits out his enemy, who makes time, who, to use a more current and pedestrian term, gives the enemy time.
It is also the first thing I learned when I was taught angling as a boy. …
http://www.paulding.net/bin/url.cgi/13277.14
The letter and the response of the MSM aren’t that important. What is important is the realpolitik going on under the covers. At no time since the cold war has the situation been as tense as it is right now. But it isn’t because of the nutbar President in Iran and it isn’t because of a so-called “unstable” Iraq. The US seems to be the worlds punching bag. Yet they continue to stay the course in Iraq and are engaged in meaningful multilateral discussions with the UN and the council negotiating with North Korea. However, the behavior of Russia’s “new” Kremlin/KGB is very menancing. Their unacceptable Security Council vetos, their blockade of trade with Georgia, their relations with Iran, their duplicity with the EU and NATO is destabilizing joint, coherent action to manage nuclear proliferation, terrorism and democratic reform.
Kate,
To answer your question (very cynically I might add), yes, I believe the cockroaches, er, Palestinians do look at the map.
Don’t you remember that “Far Side” cartoon of the insects dancing in joy at the sight of a mushroom cloud?
JRB:
So the answer then is to let Russia have a participatory role in the global economy so it doesn’t always appear that it is ‘losing’ ground.
If the Russian’s have a few economic wins they might be pliable enough to make concessions on the war on terror.
The Russians have always bargained hard, you just have to give them something saleable that the domestic population will view as beneficial to them. If the Russians are going to take a wash on Iranian nuclear development then by extension they need something to replace it.
The key to pliability is to show that they are winning somewhere else. Simply saying pack up your tools in Iran, isn’t going to cut it. Putin and Co. are not going to fall on their sword voluntarily. This has never been the Russian way. The west just needs to apply a little creativity, instead of playing into the current polarization.
I see no difference between the way Hans wants to deal with the Russians and the way some lefties have recommended we deal with Islamofascists.
Mike
Dealing with tyrants and dictators is nothing new to the USA they deal with them all the time. They even install them in to power when it suits them.
Other countries arestepping out from the American shadow and expressing their independence in the foreign policy area.Americans cutting off someone does not cripple them anymore because now that nation can find other countries ready willing and able to provide goods and services.
Mike
Remember, this is all about economic power. Iran was the first country in the Middle East to have a democratic form of government in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s. The trouble was that this government wanted to nationalize their oil. The American response was to send in the CIA to overturn the democratic government and install the Shah of Iran, an American puppet who let American business have their way in his country.
That is the key. As long as you allow American business to do their thing without too much being asked in return then it doesn’t matter what the government does to its people. Saddam Hussein was a favourite of America in the 1980’s. He nationalized his oil. A big mistake.
Cuban sugar and casinos were owned by Americans until Castro nationalized them. A big mistake.
If you understand that the real driving force behind American foreign policy is the advancement of America Incorporated then it all makes sense.