Posted on 07/20/2006 6:15:23 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
The world faces different crises all the time, and each generation feels its crises to be the biggest. But nobody can ignore the fact that recent developments in certain parts of the world are having a major impact on the relations between nations and peoples.
The recent North Korean missile tests, the terrorist attack on trains in India, the nuclear standoff with Iran, massive sectarian turmoil in Iraq, oil prices at unprecedented levels, the capture of Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah and Israeli raids into Lebanon that have resulted in the deaths of more than 200 civilians — these are just a few examples of the crises humanity is facing today.
There are two ways to deal with these developments. One is to impose unilateral solutions that concentrate on only a small part of the world community, and that benefit only a slice of the world's population, such as Western countries. The other way is to approach these problems from a holistic point of view, with the participation of different actors, and with the aim of benefiting a greater number of nations, including those in Asia and the Middle East.
(Excerpt) Read more at forward.com ...
Click on the link to the article and scroll to the bottom. Emphasis mine.
You will see the author's credentials:
Abbas Maleki served as deputy foreign minister of Iran from 1989 to 1997. He is director general of the International Institute for Caspian Studies in Tehran, and a senior research fellow at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.
Why, exactly, am I not surprised?
No cheers, unfortunately.
I thought this was Scrappleface! Only it's not as clever.
I agree. Give I'mawhackjob in Iran 300% of his FDA requirement of nuts, grains, berries, and trace minerals and I think everything would be ok. Wait, I forgot, he probably should get his selenium also.
When somebody talks about "actors" but not the kind in TV shows and movies, they're lecturing from a high, isolated ivory tower.
He needs a little plutonium and uranium also....up the arse.
While we're at it why don't we let Kim Jong keep order in Asia?
Iran has earned nothing except scorn, deserves nothing but the same. Get rid of Ahmadinejad and the mullahs and we'll think about talking.
One would be the suggestion that the principal state sponsor of terrorism in the world should be put in charge of controlling terrorism.
Another is that Iran's goal on nukes is to have a 'face-saving' solution that "maintains a minimum degree of access to nuclear technology inside Iran." He goes on to say: "Iran simply wants to see better-defined and better-clarified terms in the incentive offer" on nukes from the west. That's right, Iran is only intransigent because the contract isn't quite clear enoug. LOL.
But the crown jewel of the article is that: "When it comes to terrorism, the problem is mainly rooted in extremism. Extremism exists not only in the Muslim world, but also in Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism." Yes, but today, terrorism exists only in the Muslim world. The author knows that; hence the neat little flip from 'terrorism' to 'extremism.'
"If you look at the performance of Iran's Islamic Republic, it is clear despite all of the difficulties it has faced — the problems, the turmoil and the wars all around Iran — the system has survived. This is not accidental; rather, it shows that the Iranian system has checks and balances — think tanks and consultative bodies, as well as other structures and processes for rational decision-making — that permit the system to achieve optimum results."
Yes. So rational that they expect the Imam Mahdi to pop out of a well.
"Regarding the nuclear issue, Iran is seeking a face-saving resolution that maintains a minimum degree of access to nuclear technology inside Iran. The incentives proposed to Iran by the "5+1 group" — the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, plus Germany — are exactly the sort of things that Iran's economy and industries need. Iran simply wants to see better-defined and better-clarified terms in the incentive offer, something that is not very hard for the other side to provide. Addressing Iran's nuclear concerns can only strengthen the Non-Proliferation Treaty and ease the way for new steps to be taken together in the global effort against the threats posed by nuclear weapons and nuclear stockpiles."
ping to me for later
As this is the opening sentence to his conclusion, I'm impressed that he’s openly acknowledging the US and Iran are at war. Unfortunately his pretext suggests he's only prepared for the unconditional surrender of the United States and her allies. Interestingly, Maleki represents Rafsanjani’s crew, but is less adept at double talk than their master. His words are completely without substance primarily because this phase of the American war with Iran was not started by his cadre, nor does he have the authority to negotiate a settlement to it.
After a second read… This work appears to be a sign of dissention in the fascist’s ranks. It’s a feeble gesture to Western powers that he is ready to make a deal when those that hold the reigns of power are not. Could he be the West’s chosen one, as Mohamed Khatemi was the West’s Ayatollah Gorbachev? No sir Maleki… not you.
How about regeme change in Iran?
Iran is already involved, it's just that we'll use bombs to in our "talks".
I prefer the third way. Smouldering turbans until not one threat is heard throughout the world.
I propose a counter-offer. We declare Iran a regional power and give its government a place at the table with respect to Middle East policy. Their new government, that is. The mullahs need to be swinging from the lamp-posts first.
Brought to you by the same a**holes who have always supported Syria's presence in Lebanon to "keep order".
Drugs are bad, mmkay?
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.