Posted on 05/15/2006 12:02:52 PM PDT by SJackson
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? And when Russian President Putin calls Bush's America "Comrade Wolf," does he not have at least a small patch of ground on which to stand?
Which brings me to the point. There is no reason to believe Iran wants war with us. If she did want war with America, she could have had it any time in the last 27 years. If she did want war with America, all the old ayatollah had to do was continue holding those American hostages after Ronald Reagan raised his right hand. He didn't. As Reagan recited the oath, the hostages were clearing Iranian air space.
In all those years, Iran has never attacked the United States and has been tied to but one terror attack against us: the Khobar Towers 10 years ago. No evidence has been found that Iran had any role in 9-11, the first attack on the World Trade Center, the suicide attack on the U.S.S. Cole or the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.
Comes the reply. Iran was almost surely behind the bombing of the U.S. Embassy and Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983 and the hostage-taking of the Reagan era. Iran supports Hezbollah and Hamas and plotted the bombing of the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, and Herr Ahmadinejad routinely promises the eradication of Israel.
But if he wants a war with Israel, he could have it tomorrow by launching rockets. If he wants war with America, Bush and Cheney will accommodate him. He has done neither.
Ahmadinejad is behaving like a man provoking us to hit him, but not too hard, so he can play the "victim" of U.S. "aggression" without winding up in the hospital or the morgue.
For while Iran's regime might benefit from heroically enduring U.S. strikes to destroy its nuclear facilities – none of which is near producing atom-bomb material – a major war would be a disaster for Iran. Not only would the regime be denuded of modern weapons, it would be set back decades to where the Arabs, Azeris, Baluchis and Kurds might try to break the country up, even as Iraq is breaking up.
But this would be a disaster for the United States as well. For an attack on Iran would unify Persians in hatred of America, the way Pearl Harbor unified Americans. And a breakup of Iran could create a new archipelago of terrorist training camps across the Middle East.
What we are getting at is that there is common ground between the United States and Iran. Neither of us would benefit from a major war. Both of us benefit if there is a reliable flow of oil and gas out of the Gulf and Central Asia. Neither of us wants to see the return of the Taliban or rise of al-Qaida, which is anti-Shiite. In his 18-page letter, Ahmadinejad powerfully condemned the massacre of 9-11.
And Tehran must be having second thoughts about whether to go nuclear when that could mean Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt might follow suit, and the United States and Israel would put a hair trigger on their missile arsenals, and target them on Tehran.
Better to talk. To test the waters, President Bush might take up Ahmadinejad's missive, manifest the same respect for Islam that he showed for Jesus of Nazareth, rebut his attacks on America and lay down what Bush would like to see in a future relationship with Iran.
We have much to talk about: terror, nuclear power, Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, oil, what we owe Iran and what Iran owes us.
"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."
Let's just imagine for a minute what the past would have most probably been like if Iran was allowed to develop unfettered nuclear weapon factories and long ranged missiles while being financed from their vast oil wealth, 27 years ago.
In the 27 years since Iran has become an unchecked nuclear super power, Libya has been "wiped off the map", Grenada has been "wiped off the map", Lebanon including the Bekaa Valley and the Chouf Mountains have been "wiped off the map".
Panama has been "wiped off the map", Kuwait has been "wiped off the map", Somalia has been "wiped off the map", Haiti has been "wiped off the map", Sudan has been "wiped off the map", Bosnia has been "wiped off the map", Serbia has been "wiped off the map", Kosovo has been "wiped off the map".
Poland and the Baltic States have all been "wiped off the map", Central Asia has been "wiped off the map".
Afghanistan has been "wiped off the map", Iraq has been "wiped off the map".
Imagine what would happen Soviet Union "was allowed to develop unfettered nuclear weapon factories and long ranged missiles". We all would be wiped out.
"maybe he does have a point, and maybe he's right after all?"
Or most likely Pat Buchanan IS a nut.
"Imagine what would happen Soviet Union "was allowed to develop unfettered nuclear weapon factories and long ranged missiles". We all would be wiped out."
That actually came very close, it was called the Cuban Missile Crisis. Do you really want to take a gamble like that with Iran?
The Iranians have acknowledged "holding" Al Qaeda figures. Thus far they haven't charged or tried any of those figures, so one must assume they're (at best) under a very permissive form of "house arrest".
Line ripped off from the MSM. The Iranians are just trying to turn their "Iran vs the UN (IAEA)" problem into an "Iran vs the US" problem for information warfare purposes (domestic and international consumption). I knew years ago that Pat was an "America First" nationalist. Later, when he ran against "Bush II", he proposed a "living wage" for workers, a socialist idea if I ever heard one. So you could say that he's a "Nationalist Socialist".
They might place it centuries earlier with the current battle dating from 1948.
Presuming Iranians=Jihadists, I suppose you're right. If the Iranian people aren't a jihadist equivalent, then I'd go with 1979, they had decent relations with the US and Israel, who Iran recognized, till then.
I know we backed the Shah big time before he was ousted but don't remember how that fit in with respect to 1979 as the start of the differences.
They attacked us in 1979, prior to that we had good relations with Iran, and I presume the Iranian people. I assume your reference to 1948 was to the founding of Israel. Iran was one of the first countries to recognize Israel, and had good relations until 1979, when the jihadists gained power.
In my view Rummyfan was correct in dating the conflict to 1979, not 1948. Or particularly thousands of years. Persians, though fellow Muslims, have not had particularly close relations with Arabs till the post 1979 era, common enemies.
Pat must have forgotten about the hostages. And the threats to close the straights of Hormuz. And their funding of terrorist groups that have declared war on us. And the insurgent war they are fighting against us in Iraq. And their funding of and ongoing support of Hamas.
Pat lost it a long time ago. Pats answer to everything is to dig a hole and hide inside bunker America, hoping the rest of the world will go away and leave us alone.
Pat has supported foreign aid for Hamas. This goes beyond hiding in a bunker. One can be isolationist and still recognize the evil of our enemies, simply advocate a different course. There's something else at work in his recent pro-Putin (including the headline allusion), pro-Hamas, pro-Iran advocacy. I'd prefer to think it's simply Bush hatred and nothing more, but it appears that he identifies America as an expansive, colonial power, and sympathizes with our "victims". The sheep, preyed upon by the wolf.
Whatever's at work, it certainly isn't his brain. He's all over the map these days and getting more incoherent everytime he opens his mouth. He's a manifesto short of becoming the Una-Bomber. If it isn't Bush's fault, it's Isreals. it's time for Pat to up his meds and change the tinfoil in his hat.
Do you think the Iranians view our overthrow of their elected government and installation of the Shah as an act of war?
The Communists, for all their faults, were never big believers in the glories of martyrdom the same can not be said for the Islamic Republic of Iran and her proxies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.