Yeah, because that worked so well in 1979, didn't it, Jimmy?
Posted on 10/09/2007 11:41:29 AM PDT by presidio9
Diplomacy, not military action, "definitely" remains the best approach to dealing with Iran, former President Jimmy Carter said in a wide-ranging interview on The Early Show Tuesday.
"Even after the Shah (of Iran) was deposed," Carter told co-anchor Harry Smith, "I quickly restored diplomatic relations with Iran. As a matter of fact, that's been proven by the fact I had about 60 diplomats in Iran, and they had an equal number in Washington, so we were continuing to try to communicate with them and work with them. And I think that, now, with increasing evidence that Iran is a dangerous and unpredictable country, the best thing to do is to have a maximum diplomatic relationship.
"They're potentially dangerous and they're certainly unpredictable. But I think that if we could find some way to communicate directly with them, to reassure their fears that we might attack them, which is constantly a drumbeat out of Washington, maybe deliberately from the administration or inadvertent -- Sy Hirsh has written three or four articles in the New Yorker, though I haven't read the latest one, but he's always maintaining that the United States is preparing to attack Iran. They read those articles and they see all the other news, and if they feel that they're going to be attacked, then I think that's one incentive for them to be more militant. So, I think, to assuage their fears, and to tell them the truth about our intentions, would be more helpful."
Still, Smith noted, "It seems to me we've done a pretty clear job of letting our intentions be known, yet they remain recalcitrant, at best. Is a military strike an option?"
"I don't think so," Carter said. "Not at this early stage, and I don't think that anybody in the administration has maintained openly that that is a present option. Every indication I've heard from Condoleezza Rice or President Bush has been, 'We want to resort to diplomatic means to -- as thoroughly as we possibly can before we would consider a military strike.'
"So, I think a military strike against Iran at this time would be completely unnecessary and counterproductive. Iran is a different proposition from what Iraq was when we attacked Iraq. It wouldn't be an easy thing to invade Iran. And where would we get the troops? We don't even have enough troops for Iraq. Where would we get them from? And I don't think we would have any other nation in the world that would join us in any sort of military adventure against Iran. So, diplomacy is the best approach."
Carter's latest book, "Beyond the White House: Waging Peace, Fighting Disease, Building Hope," covers the work he's done around the world since leaving office -- and continues to do.
He discussed it, and much more on The Early Show Tuesday, including his recent criticism of Sudan for the violence and humanitarian crisis in its Darfur region, his thoughts on the Clinton administration's handling of Sudan, and the big apartheid/Israel controversy he sparked.
A previous book of his, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," and subsequent remarks about the Israel-Palestinian conflict, prompted an uproar from Jewish groups and the resignation of 14 people from an advisory board of the Carter Center, the 25-year-old Atlanta-based humanitarian organization.
Asked Tuesday by Smith if he has any regrets over the book or the remarks, Carter replied, "No, not at all. The book is absolutely correct, and I think it was necessary and has played a good role and was overwhelmingly approved, although there were some that objected to it. The book was written about Palestine, not Israel. And the second word in the title, as you just mentioned, was 'peace,' not apartheid. And I think a lot of people adopted the word 'apartheid' as the No. 1 thrust of the book and it's not even mentioned in the book, as a matter of fact.
"But, I think the peace effort that's belatedly gonna be attempted in November is a very good development. As you know, for seven years, since Bill Clinton left office, we've had not a single day of good-faith negotiations between Israel and its neighbors, and it's highly overdue. And my hope is that we'll see some constructive efforts being made on the Palestinian side and the Israeli side when they convene in the United States in November."
Diplomacy, not military action, “definitely” remains the best approach to dealing with Iran, former President Jimmy Carter said
then the answer is clear...we must absolutely! attack Iran.
what ever Carters says we should do, we should do the exact opposite!
My God, how did this guy ever come to power?
It’s like I grew up and now I look back to find my boyhood president was Dennis Kusinich!
There aren't 120 diplomats in the world, Mr Peanut.
Yes, Iraq was different. There we had to make sure we didn’t create a vacuum in which terrorists would come in and create a terrorist state, exporting terror throughout the region and world. But with Iran, they’re already a terrorist state, exporting terror throughout the region and world, and have been for many years, and it’s only going to get worse if they get the bomb. So what do we have to lose?
In the interest of fairness, I’ll add those points to my post #39.
(Take-away lesson here — don’t forget the /sarc tag.)
He seems to think that every CinC would bungle the invasion as badly as he did.
Yeah, because that worked so well in 1979, didn't it, Jimmy?
Thanks for the advise Jimmbo. No one could possibly have set the bar lower for invading Iran. Your rescue mission in Iran could not have gone worse if you had planned to fail. Hmmmmm. The Code Pinko babes have better strategerists. This sorry excuse for a CIC and ex-president needs to spend more time changing his Depends and less time betraying us.
Amy told him it was a bad idea.
Jimmy Carter should know, because he was the greatest president that Iran has had since 1979.
Sounds like Carter’s saying “Don’t taze me, bro!”
Taking advice from Jimmy Carter on Iran is like taking advice on hiring interns from Bill Clinton!
Listen to Carter on Iran??? Now that is a joke!
You know, Jimmuh, what if we just invade where the REAL nuts are — Plains, Georgia.
Constitution Day: Mr. Carter, You Are No Longer President.
We shouldn't invade Iran. We should strike from the air and sea (and maybe some specops, but sssshhh, we don't know about that).
"Even after the Shah (of Iran) was deposed, (becasue I refused to support him opening the door to extremist to take control of the country)" Carter told co-anchor Harry Smith, "I quickly restored diplomatic relations with (tried to negotiate the release of American hostages) from Iran. As a matter of fact, that's been proven by the fact (I caused there to be) had about more than 60 diplomats (hostages) in Iran, and they had an equal number (of spies) in Washington, so we were continuing to try to communicate with them and work with them (because I got troops killed by throwing together a haphazard plan to rescue the hostages). And I think that, now, with increasing evidence that Iran is a dangerous and unpredictable country, the best thing to do is to have a maximum diplomatic (appeasement) relationship (so they won't kidnap more Americans).
There. See how I fixed that.
Jimmy ought to know as he was the main cause of the current mess in Iran.
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.