Posted on 11/29/2006 11:50:37 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Can Iran help us bail out of Iraq? Maybe - but we'd better take a hard look at the price.
The idea has reportedly been floated via a draft report to the Iraq Study Group (headed by former Secretary of State James Baker), which calls for a "dialogue" with Iran as well as Syria. Along the same lines, British Prime Minister Tony Blair recently said Iran could be a "partner" with the West if it did not develop a bomb.
Presumably, we'd ask Iran to help stabilize the situation in Iraq, curb the Shiite militias and encourage the Iraqi government to make sufficient concessions to the Sunnis to end or at least reduce the violence.
Would it work? It could. Iran certainly has sought to arm and enflame the Shiites in Iraq. Maybe the mullahs can rein in their proxies, and let us withdraw in dignity - not holding onto the skids of the helicopter as it lifts off our embassy this time.
But why would they play ball with Washington at the same time that Bush is threatening sanctions explicitly and a military strike implicitly if Iran proceeds to develop nuclear weapons? No chance.
So this proposal amounts to the de facto abandonment of any military or economic actions that could deter Iran from going nuclear.
Of course, Baker may seek and Iran may offer public assurances that it won't develop nuclear weapons - the same worthless assurances it now passes out to the entire world. What will have changed is that America and Britain will be so engaged with Iran that they can't and won't bomb or even impose tough sanctions.
(Excerpt) Read more at vote.com ...
Yep, the Toesucker definitely nailed it.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II
Baker is on to something. Iran and Syria are the key.
The problem is, making a deal with them won't work. That'll just make things worse.
What we SHOULD be talking about, is how to destroy Iran and Syria, not how we can essentially appease them.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II
Only problem is, this will be much, much worse then our defeat in Somalia.
Frankly, I'm starting to doubt America really has the balls to be a world leader anymore. And with us, down goes democratic civil society. I sure hope I'm just suffering from a bout of bad-day pessimism.
I'm a grad student, one of my professors (a very conservative guy) refers to Baker's political philosophy as "Unrealistic Realism." That about sums it up, and it's gonna get us killed. I cannot think of anything more unrealistic then assuming Iran or Syria will do anything that will aid us in the long run unless it is by complete mistake.
IF this is true, what happened to the Bush doctrine? I have spent thousands of hours arguing with hundreds of people about why we have to stay on the offense against Islamofascists and the states that support them. I still believe this...but over the past year, I have sadly come to think that W. no longer does.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II
That's what worries me too.
It's difficult to know what's going on. Bush's history seems to say he won't give up, but the history of folks like Gates and Baker seem to suggest they might.
God help us if Bush has gone wobbily. I guess it's gonna take downtown Boston to go up in a nuclear fireball for us to wake up.
Yep.
I was just hoping we didn't need downtown Tampa, Seattle, Nashville, Boston, or (insert favorite American City Here) to go up in a giant fireball to learn our lesson. You would have thought 9/11 was enough.
Iran is the key. No need to waste time with Syria, it's nothing without Iran and its money and oil... once regime change happens in Iran, then Syria, Iraq (al-Sadr), Lebanon (Hezbollah), "Palestine" (Hamas, al-Aqsa...) all fall apart. I believe that's the only reason Damascus is not reduced to rubble by now.
NoKo will also get religion quite fast, and Russia and China, and France lose their Most Valuable Player in the ME since the fall of Saddam. Without dependent clients there is no power. Chavez, then, will also need all his oil just to keep at bay with angry poor mob back at home.
Iran IS THE KEY, period.
btt
Baker-Hamilton commission is a smokescreen for the Dems and media, there are several other commissions with a lot more serious people on board than Sandra Day O'Connor and Vernon Jordan, which means it would be easy to dismiss.
Baker and Scowcroft should not be anywhere near solutions to ME "problems" and I am sure GWB knows it just as well as he now knows more about Powell / Armitage / Wilkerson and others in the ME cabal.
This is just like 9/11 commission, everybody will pick what they like from it, Hamilton will do the tour around country, people will write articles and sell some books, but it's not material to the policy, troop levels etc.
What and when will be actually done, I don't know, it will depend on military and NSC advice, but I am sure he knows who stands where in the ME.
My inner armchair psychologist thinks the President is just tired. I think he has some hardass in him (courtesy of his mom), but I think he also really wants to compromise and be liked (courtesy of his dad). It's these latter instincts of his that I believe we're seeing now. I hope this assessment turns out to be wrong.
:(
Yes, Iran is the KEY.
I hope you're right. It seems as if we've already waited too long. I get the sense that W.'s lame duckedness is weighing on him these days -- is he really going to be willing to wage war on Iran? Or at this point is he kicking the can down the street for someone else to handle?
Why do old politicians always need a make-work project? Why can't they just kick back and relax?
I suspect he would be. But not without provocation, as it should be.
Belligerent rhetoric and nuclear ambitions aren't by themselves enough excuse for war. If they were, we'd be tussling with North Korea right about now.
My professor pointed out that all the true believers, other then Cheney, are gone now. Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc. Not a good sign.
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.