Please Bomb Me!(Iran/Victor Davis Hanson)

Real Clear Politics ^ | April 05, 2007 | Victor Davis Hanson

[Billthedrill]

And by kidnapping last month the British sailors and marines, Iran de facto involved the European Union - Iran's largest trading partner.

...whose response was disappointing to say the least. And while I agree completely with VDH that -

...if the EU would cease all its trade with Iran, and if the West would divest entirely from the country - that is, boycott all companies that do any business with Tehran - the theocracy would face bankruptcy within months.

...it is simply extremely difficult to see that happening. On principal objective of this was to drive a wedge between Great Britain and the United States but the upshot was to drive that wedge between Great Britain and the other member states of the EU. When the "all for one" principle of collective security takes a back seat to existing commercial contracts and political differences with a party outside the organization, the collective security has collapsed. Without it "soft power" is no power and the only alternative is capitulation.

That seems to be the upshot of the EU/Iran nuclear negotiations as well. Khrushchev was correct about the west selling the rope used to hang it.

[Tolik]

Hi, Mike. I ping to Hanson’s articles but far from being the only one to post them. I am happy that one of my favorite authors is so much appreciated. The surest way to let me know that article is already posted is to ping me. Some posters do that immediately after posting the article. Sometimes somebody else on the thread will help. Then I will alert all VDH ping list subscribers.

As for duplicate posts, i think that we can’t have too many Hanson’s threads. More the better.

Another thing that helps is to put keywords: Victor Davis Hanson and VDH. This will ensure that article will be easier to find when searched by a keyword. (IMHO - indexing by a keyword is a powerful but not uniformly used feature of FR).

Thank you,

[The Pack Knight]

Basically, the guy wants to show how tough he still is, but at some level realizes that a war with Iran would be a catastrophe.

You may be right, but they seem determined to leave us no choice. For one, the blockade he mentions would probably not be bloodless. I can certainly see them making an attempt to close off the Straits of Hormuz, and it'd be nasty work forcing them open, perhaps even requiring the occupation of Qushm Island and parts of the mainland coast to the east of there.

Whether or not war with Iran would be a catastrophe, we'd better be ready for it.

[HardStarboard]

>>>realizes that a war with Iran would be a catastrophe. <<<

Please describe how a war with Iran would be a catastrophe, and for whom, in ten sentences or less.

Then describe how unfettered hegemony over the Middle East by an Iran armed with nuclear weapons would be a catastrophe for the Free World...and in particular the United States. You can have as many sentences as required.

Unfortunatedly, a lot more thought, and ink, has been given to the problems if we attack Iran than if we don't attack Iran!!