Toward a Realistic Peace

Summary: The next U.S. president will face three key foreign policy challenges: setting a course for victory in the terrorists' war on global order, strengthening the international system the terrorists seek to destroy, and extending the system's benefits. With a stronger defense, a determined diplomacy, and greater U.S. economic and cultural influence, the next president can start to build a lasting, realistic peace.

Iran is a case in point. The Islamic Republic has been determined to attack the international system throughout its entire existence: it took U.S. diplomats hostage in 1979 and seized British sailors in 2007 and during the decades in between supported terrorism and murder. But Tehran invokes the protections of the international system when doing so suits it, hiding behind the principle of sovereignty to stave off the consequences of its actions. This is not to say that talks with Iran cannot possibly work. They could -- but only if we came to the table in a position of strength, knowing what we wanted.
The next U.S. president should take inspiration from Ronald Reagan's actions during his summit with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavík in 1986: he was open to the possibility of negotiations but ready to walk away if talking went nowhere. The lesson is never talk for the sake of talking and never accept a bad deal for the sake of making a deal. Those with whom we negotiate -- whether ally or adversary -- must know that America has other options. The theocrats ruling Iran need to understand that we can wield the stick as well as the carrot, by undermining popular support for their regime, damaging the Iranian economy, weakening Iran's military, and, should all else fail, destroying its nuclear infrastructure.

The State Department recently declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps on its list of terrorist organizations, opening the way to curtailing and/or confiscating its financial assets which are extensive.

Rafsanjani may be moving to the head of the Council of Experts.

Daily killings of U.S. forces by Iranian operatives and devices may drive the president off his "new tone/restrictive rules of engagement" position.

Slowly the Federal government acknowledges the 800-pound gorilla slouching through the streets of Baghdad comes from Tehran.

Please, Mr. President, deal with this now, before Iran's Amok-Jihadinut has his nuclear weapons and uses them.

"...At the core of all Americans is the belief that all human beings have certain inalienable rights that proceed from God but must be protected by the state..."

Nifty twist of words there - the 'State' MUST be in charge of my inalienable rights!

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The word 'regulated', in the context of the time it was written, means 'trained' today. It never meant 'controlled-by-the-State'.

Rudy was, and still is, a gun-grabber, and the Second Ammendment was included because there are people like him!

Rudy likes a well-armed Army fighting on foreign soil, but will dis-arm them when they come home. He talks a good game, but in his USA, the only people with guns are his policemen and the criminals ....................... FRegards

There is an old chinese proverb: It is better to work for a lucky man, than a smart man. A lucky man will succeed in spite of his mistakes, a smart man will not.

Giuliani, I suspect, is a lucky man; As well as being smart. But, by his own account, he should have died in 9/11. The emergency operations center had been set up in one of the trade center towers. If not for a person who worked in the towers who found them, they would have been trapped there.

More importantly, that was his trial by fire which has prepared him for similar crises in the future.

Between him and Thompson, Giuliani knows how to lead, and understands leadership in a practical way. I’m not sure the same things can be said for Thompson. Now, I’ve read Thompson’s resume. It’s impressive. But you have to strain to find examples of executive experience. It could be the kiss of death for his candidacy.

I say this feeling very uncomfortable with Giuliani’s liberal stances. Ideologically, I would rather have Thompson as president. But, as I think about their relative leadership capabilities, it just seems obvious that Rudi could do a better job of galvaninizing and inspiring people.

The one thing I am not quite sure what to make of was a speech when the full force of having lost over 300 firemen hit him right in the gut. In that moment, Rudi was overcome. He staggered and had to sit down on the stage while he was dealing with reality of this loss. Compassion? Weakness? Just being human? I’m just not sure.

The image problems that could be created by an American president doing this are considerable. It could be right up there with Ed Muskie crying.

Agreed. If you wanted to be mayor of New York, a horrible job but someone has to do it, you are not going to get there by insisting on changing gun control laws or supporting an anti-abortion platform.

The mayor of NY’s control of New Yorks henious guns laws is low. Many are state laws, some are city laws. Perhaps he could have worked for loosening, and he didn’t. OK. As for abortion, changes there will come either from SCOTUS or Ammedment process, neither of which are key job responsibilities of the mayor.

If Rudy sold his soul to become mayor of a hellhole like NYC what do you think he'll do to become president? And what would he do to get reelected? If Rudy wins my guns are as good as gone.

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.