Pressuring Iran

“the gathering campaign of major businesses deciding not to do business with Iran”

And yet:

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/investor-relations/

http://ikejakson.wordpress.com/2010/04/24/abdullah-and-the-truth/

I hope this comment will get through even though I don’t cite my own blog (True confession: I don’t have a blog.).
.
As you post it, Joe, it sounds like good news, and we can all use some good news. What makes me worry is that all this pressure will cause the Iranian regime to explode rather than implode. I know we like to think that even Khaemeini and Ahmadinejad are not so insane as to, say, throw the kitchen sink at Israel (with plenty of Arabs cheering them on) or turn off their oil wells. But can we really be sure? And what if we guess wrong?
.
Got any reassurance for us?

I enjoy reading liberals as they squirm under the pressure of Obama’s appeasement doctrine for dealing with the Iranians. Even Joe Klein seems to be less anti-Israel in this post than usual.
.
Are libs finally getting nervous about Iran? Seems like it from bobell’s anxiety riddened questions.

@newfreedomblog:

Failing to engage in unprovoked bombing is not appeasement. The word you are searching for is “sanity.”

“Appeasment” is right-speak for “refraining from incinerating”. They don’t seem happy unless someone is dying in agony.

Just curious “R”, what would you deem to be “provoked”? Not just bombing, that is a no brainer, but do you believe that a nuclear Iran is good for the World in general? Is that how you see this all?

I thought the Iranian public supported their government with regards to wanting nuclear power… and with not making deals with foreign governments to remove processing capability. So many articles I’ve read- including many from Time- say exactly that. So what is up with this “The Iranian people are with us on nukes” opinion?
(BTW, I’m not saying that the Iranian public’s intent is completely innocent… but it’s hard to say “your lack of freedom is for your own darn good” as an American. Well, what the hell. We have the Patriot Act, right?)

the shame of international isolation fuels the anger of the Iranian public toward its government

Isn’t the danger just the opposite — that isolation will fuel public anger toward the West? And that the regime can use this to distract attention away from its own failings? (Although that seemingly has not happened yet.) From what I’ve been reading (and as mhissong said), aren’t most Iranians in favor of the nuclear program?

You only wish it is simply “right-speak”. It is and has been Obama’s foreign policy since taking office, period. It is what he promised like everything else in his campaign he pledged to do. One thing cannot be said about Obama, when he promises to do something, he most certainly follows through with it all. At least those things that he knows will destroy the United States of America.
.
Obama provided us with a perverted health care system.
.
Obama has proceeded in creating the largest national debt we have ever had in this country outside of World War II. Due to Obama this country is just one more economic failure from bankruptcy.
.
Obama has proceeded in bank takeovers, Car company takeovers, bailouts for Wall Street, and more big government regulatory reform. He has met each and everyone of his promises to date to his far left liberal / socialist extremists base of support.
.
Why would you think his foreign policy agenda of appeasement for the Islamic Republic of Iranian Mulsim Terrorists to be any different?
.
Americans need only ask themselves, “do you feel safer now than you did 5 years ago”?? Will Americans feel safer when Ahmadenijad possesses a nuclear bomb?

newfreedom: Rather than ranting about the auto industry (btw, did you know GM is paying the money back?), what’s your proposed solution to the Iranian nuclear program?

actually, iran is not in violation of the NPT, although they did sign it (unlike, eg, pakistan and israel)

reading about iran, one gets an idea what the media in the PRK must be like. can someone please tell me when they last attacked another country and why americans should wet the bed at the thought of them becoming the 3rd nuclear power in the region? (which, by all but the most krauthammerianly hysterical accounts, they’re years away from becoming)

oh yeah, i forgot, iran detains people indefinitely without access to the country’s courts. what kind of backward, uncivilized countr-

never mind.

I believe that Iranians were in favor of a nuclear program that was supposed to be about providing energy, since despite being oil-rich they are refinement-poor. However, the Iranian people are no longer walking around with their eyes closed, they see their government for exactly what it is and probably have no stomach for a weaponized nuclear program since they know as usual its the common people who will pay the price for war — not their big mouthed, swaggering leaders (yes Virginia, Iran has its versions not Cheney and McCain). The people don’t want the bomb, they want electricity that’s affordable. their leaders promised to get it, but then their leaders promised them a lot of things and as we witnessed the Green rebellion, their leaders are no longer pretending to be what they never were.

and they’re also made common cause with their sunni enemies

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hwK_CSpBxsNuVUEaDuOwmSSCiqGwD9F91OVO0

attacking shi’ite religious sites to weaken the shi’ia-led government in iraq, cause, well, — i don’t know, maybe if i banged my head against the wall for a couple of years, i could find a way to blame this on iran too. WMD anyone?

“Americans need only ask themselves, “do you feel safer now than you did 5 years ago”

I feel safer when the mentally insane of this country are not in power I. E. Bush, Cheney, Rummy, etc.
.
Frankly Rusty the biggest threat to America today is the GOP which is the far right in this country. For all the the talk of of individual freedom, you guys sure seem to abandon it on the pretense of fear. From voter registration ID, national ID cards, militia groups, not excepting election results, the list goes on. It is a personal vendetta against anyone or any institution that does not see things your way. In other words your party has determined to make war against anyone or any institution that does not see things your way, and that includes our Democratically elected Government.

NewRusty: When do you want us to bomb, just before they have the bomb or just after? Where do we bomb? Do you know where all of their facilities are? What if we do great civilian damage? What will the reaction of Iran’s neighbors be? Will we have allies on this venture? How do we follow-up after bombing, invade? What happens with the noble “Green Revolution”?
.
Rusty, you have the simplistic view of foreign policy that brought us to Iraq and a failure to learn.

“what’s your proposed solution to the Iranian nuclear program?”

.
A complete and total blockade of Iran. NOTHING in and NOTHING out. The hope would be to stimulate a regime change. The result of a crippling blockade with sanctions would be the Iranian people, who Obama would not support, to finally overthrow the holocaust denier, Ahmadenijad and his patron Khamenei.

Rather answering a question with a question which by the way is the liberals thought that is how “smart and intelligent they are”, why don’t you take a stab at it yourself april2562 and answer it yourself.

Taken together, these are increasing the pressure on the regime significantly…

Without China’s buy-in for enacting sanctions against Iran, there’s still not enough pressure.

Rustyblog, do you any clue how unfeasible that idea is?
-
Let’s start with oil. Iran is one of the members of OPEC. Even assuming that we buy no Iranian oil (which I hope we don’t anyway, but who knows with world markets as convoluted as they are today) we will have to deal with the fallout from other OPEC members, such as Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. You think these guys are gonna ignore it when we blockade their geographic and business partner? I don’t.
-
Second: Russia: US-Russian relations aren’t too hot (pun intended) as it is. You try to blockade one of Russia’s business partners, and large amounts of feces will hit a spinning object at high speeds.
-
Read this little article, from the heritage foundation no less, and maybe you’ll figure out why Russia is unlikely to go along with US blockade.
-
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/01/Russias-Iran-Policy-A-Curveball-for-Obama
- Third: China: Even if the US buys no Iranian products, directly or indirectly, China has been both utterly amoral and quite determined in getting more energy. This include a large chunk of Iranian oil.
-
http://news.asianstudies.dk/2009/07/sino-iranian-relations/
-
You really think China is going to voluntarily slow their economic growth to keep the US happy? Not happening.
-
Fourth, there’s the sheer difficulty in what you’re proposing. Surrounding and physically barricading Iran (which is what your “idea” would require) would require a huge mass of man-power and technology. Even assuming that we weren’t already involved in two wars, your suggestion would require manpower comparable to that of a full-scale invasion. Under the circumstances, where we are invlovled in two wars, your suggestion is a physical impossibility.
-
And fifth; doing so would motivate the Iranian people to rally around their corrupt and unpopular gov’t, making it stronger and ultimately harming US interests. In case you haven’t noticed, the Iranians don’t exactly love their gov’t. Barricading Iran would just make the Iranian people, who are nationalistic to begin with, back up their gov’t, which entrenches and energizes the far right Iranian fringe.
-
So here are a few reason why your proposal is esn;t an option. Any other bright ideas you’d like to be disabused of?

NFB~
~
A complete and total blockade of Iran. NOTHING in and NOTHING out. The hope would be to stimulate a regime change. The result of a crippling blockade with sanctions would be the Iranian people, who Obama would not support, to finally overthrow the holocaust denier, Ahmadenijad and his patron Khamenei.
~
There’s so much wrong with your assessment here, and you’re obvious motivations. Firstly, as you well know, the victims of sanctions are always the people. The Iranian regime may be faced with some hardships, sure, but overwhelmingly it will be the Iranian people, like the Iraqi people under Hussein, who will be abused by western-backed sanctions. Who is your grievance with, the Iranian government or the Iranian people? If it’s the former, then why are you advocating collective punishment? The likely outcome, of course, is not the people turning against the regime, but rather turning against the west for imposing harsh sanctions on the people of Iran.
~
Secondly, as to your motivations, you cite Ahmedinajad’s alleged holocaust denial as grounds for regime change. Seriously? Is that really what should drive American foreign policy, the distasteful opinions of foreign leaders? Maybe I’m being simple-minded, but I always thought American national security and protection of interests was the prime motivator, not whether or not we happen to align with the rhetoric of national leaders abroad. It seems to me that you, like most neocons, are not really worried about American interests, but rather Israeli interests. Iran may pose a threat to Israel, as Israel poses a threat to Iran. Admadenijad may have offended Israelis, as Netanyahu has offended Iranians. This has nothing to do with us, as Americans. Perhaps, it’s your undying affection for Israeli interests that allows you to champion a true Israeli strategy of collective punishment. Though, in your blurred tunnel-vision, you obviously haven’t noticed how inneffective and immoral Israeli collective punishment of the Palestinians happens to be.

Exiled: I’m glad to see there are a few sane people left on the right. I won’t say this often, but i agree with almost all of what you wrote.

“Exiled: I’m glad to see there are a few sane people left on the right. I won’t say this often, but i agree with almost all of what you wrote.”

.
Just because Exiled’s motivation is because he is anti-semetic doesn’t mean he is right.
.
Enjoy

Nice straw man for a come-back, there. Too bad you can’t actually rebut the arguments made.

Only a Republicant dumbhead would suggest bombing Iran without a serious justification. They have said and they will and they can sink a ship in the major seaway for the oil that the US gets from the Middle East and all it would take would be one Exocet missle and even if it isn’t exactly “our” oil, it will be someone’s oil and as you and others have noted numerous times, oil is oil and if you lessen the supply, the costs go up. I guess you are willing to get $8+/gallon gasoline if it makes the economy fail and Obama look bad. What a bunch of dog—-!

I know you want to bomb Iran and I see you as Dr Strangelove, riding the bomb down. Now if we could be sure that it would only be you hurt, that might be a willing trade-off but since it has been 4000+ American men and women who were killed in Bush’s wrong-headed war in Iraq, people like you and some Republicans want to hold the jackets while other people fight, die, or get badly injured so they feel like “real” men.

Real leaders know that war is the last resort, not the first and the military can tell you that we don’t want to start a third war when we can’t “win” either of the current two wars.

NewRusty: Unlike you and the neo cons, I can admit I am not an expert and do not have simple answers. You might want to look at Iraq and other historical references.

The only thing that Joe would like Obama to pressure Iran on is for them to annilhate Israel.

Anti-Semitic would imply that I hold bigoted views of Semitic people, so I couldn’t really be pro-Palestinian then could I, seeing as Palestinians and Arabs are Semitic, but you are well aware that I am, in fact, very pro-Palestinian. Strike one. All of my Mid East commentaries have involved Israelis and their policies, with nary a mention of Jews. Strike two. You and you’re ilk, NFB, have tossed around the charge of Anti-Semitism so freely, that even if it were true in my case, the allegation itself has become meaningless, just a reflexive deflection when you have no sensible counter argument to criticism of Israel. Strike three. You’re out. Thanks for playing,

I’m putting my money on sane foreign policy too. Exiled is about the sanest individual I know when it comes to foreign and domestic policy, even though I might not agree with him on all things.
.
Rusty:
.
Go fly a kite, or bomb Iran or something. I’m sure that PS3 is good for something…

Exiled is about the sanest individual I know when it comes to foreign and domestic policy…
~
Say what?

Yup.
.
My comment was actually in the wrong thread. It was supposed to be on the other one below. Too tired to correct it.

Joe Klein:
.
Thanks for the update on Iran. I do however have some questions concerning these sanctions.
.
How much stricter are these sanctions than those put on Iran under the Bush administration? Do you anticipate these to have a larger effect in pressuring the Iranian government? Did Bush ever limit the role of American companies in the Iranian economy?
.
How involved will other countries be in the sanction? It is scheduled to come up for a vote next month – any ideas how other countries will vote?
.
If we do limit American business in Iran, will they simply shift their financial resources to China? And for that matter, how close are the Chinese and Iranian government, both politically and economically? Do you see China propping up Iran’s economy going forward? And what about the Russian government’s involvement in these sanctions?
.
Thank you for considering my questions Joe Klein.

Just because Exiled’s motivation is because he is anti-semetic doesn’t mean he is right.
.
I don’t know about you guys, but my feeling is that NFB lost the argument right there.
.
By the way, it’s Semitic, you jackass. If you’re going to toss around tired and baseless smears like that, you could at least spell them correctly.

Cliff,
I’m having a difficult time concluding anything other than NFB simply doesn’t want to be taken seriously. He drops this ridiculously infantile cannard, complete with a silly @ss smily face, then he writes “Enjoy,” as if he’s just left us with some profound insight to ponder. Maybe he’s simply playing a facetious caricature. Who knows.

The thought that it’s all an elaborate joke that he’s playing on us has crossed my mind before.

“newdumbfreedom” and other ConservaNuts fail to remember that the Weapons of Mass Destruction that WE sold to Iraq under Saddam were intended to (and did) kill Iranians.

And the Iranians (both secular and Fundmentalist) were hostile to us because we supported the oppressive dictatorship of the Shah. Our lack of support of the secular Iranians (much like our lack of support of the Iraqis who opposed Saddam) is why the Fundamentalist Iranians were able to take over the country.

I am NOT saying that we need to have the stupidity of Islamic Fundamentalism tell us how to run our country, but I am saying that their hostility and lack of trust of the US is understandable and likely justifiable because we failed to be accountable for our own integrity and responsibility.

As Pogo said, “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

Except that the ConservaNuts and the lack of accountability of the CIA has caused us more problems than our foreign enemies.

Joe Klein is NOT anti-Israel.

What the ConservaNuts fail to realize is that the 20% Orthodox Jewish minority in Israel controls the country and their attitude and policies have contributed to and reinforced the stupidity and bigotry of the Fundamentalist Muslims and Palestinians.
Blaming Israel is the lie those governments use to abuse their own people. But the Orthodox in Israel often make it easy to be the target for blame.

By the way, I am Jewish.

I guess my accusation that Exiled is an anti-Semitic did not go over very well. Exiled has proven time and time again by his own statements that he favors Palestinian rights over Israeli rights to the lands which have been in Israeli control now for over 40 years. Land which was set up in 1948 as the new Jewish “homeland” after WWII. Land that was historically held by Jews, and land which has always been invaded by Arabs and other countries resulting in the displacement of Jews for centuries.
.
We are talking a history of this land which the Bible teaches us as being the “Promise Land” for the Jews by God. I know my atheist liberal friends do not believe in God, and therefore do not see the need to defend Israel’s right to this land. I however do. But there is historical evidence which has proven the Bible to be not only accurate, but factual in many cases.
.
Ahmadenijad has said, not “allegedly” as Exiled feebly attempted to describe it, that “the Holocaust did not happen”. He has verbally attacked Israel, covertly funded the Palestinian extremists, and smuggled bombs into this region to continue the on-going struggle between Israelis and Palestinians. Generations now have fought for this land to call their “home”.
.
History has also taught us that if we are made to choose, I for one believe that this land should be in the hands of Israelis. They have demonstrated great restraint of not only their emotions, but to not annihilate the Palestinians for the past 60+ years despite the constant barrage of attacks over the years by the Palestinians against Israelis.
.
I also know that if Israel possesses the nuclear bomb, which I do believe they do, they could have used it time and time again against their enemies. They have not. Ahmadenijad I believe WILL use the “bomb”, and his words prove that he would without hardly blinking an eye. If threatened for his actions, Ahmadenijad I am convinced would attack the United States as well.
.
Israel has been our most supportive ally, no other country has shown us more support with the possible exception of England and France. There will be a struggle over who ultimately controls this land in the Middle East. There will be more future wars. When it comes down to chosing sides, my vote is to side with Israel, a proven ally and staunch supporter of the United States. It is that simple.
.
But just for the sake of argument, let us take nuclear weapons by itself. There are already more nuclear bombs in arsenals around the world to blow up the world many times over. We simply do not need anymore, especially in the hands of a known mad-man. Supporting Ahmadenijad’s quest to secure nuclear capabilities is not only as insane as Ahmadenijad’s himself, but places the US of A at the greatest risk of harm since our own independence. By not urging our own Leadership to stop any possible Iranian nuclear bomb capabilities is condoning the next World War.
.
Iran is one coup from being an Islamic Extremist State. Iran’s instability for the past 30 years is also well documented, as are the intentions of the Islamic Extremists. Do you really believe that the Islamic Terrorist would consider flying more jet aircraft into our buildings if all they have to do is simply push a button? Keeping Iran from possessing the nuclear bomb should be Obama’s most important foreign policy goal over all others. All measures to stop Iran should be considered, despite what the Chinese or Russians have to say about it.

NFB~
So, your basis for my supposed Anti-Semitism is that I favor Palestinian rights to land over Israelis? Contrary to what you so ridiculously claim, these lands are not historically Jewish. Prior to the creation of Israel, these lands were under overwhelming Muslim control for 1300 years, with only a very miniscule Jewish minority. I know the Israelis are fond of their excavation projects to prove Jewish roots to the land, but unfortunately for them, no one has argued that there are no Jewish roots in Palestine. What the majority of the world’s people have argued, though, is that those roots are nullified by 1300 years of Arab control. You cannot uproot nearly a million inhabitants under an ancient 1300 year old claim to the land. It’s preposterous. That’s why I favor Palestinian rights to the land over Israelis, most of whom come from Europe, America, and South America. These are not people who can readily identify with either the culture or the land of Palestine. They’re Zionist occupiers, conquering lands under the banner of ethno-religious myths. To justify oppression, subjugation, conflict, death, and despair under Biblical interpretations of land ownership is an offensive and twisted manipulation of Christian teaching, NFB. You might want to ponder the incompatibility of Israeli policies with the tenets of Christianity. Any covenant God may have made with the people of Israel in ancient times has been ruptured by the Israelis’ incessant inhumanity towards the Palestinians. I’m not condoning suicide bombings or other forms of Palestinian violence, NFB, but you definitely seem to be glorifying Israeli violence, which you so niavely categorize as “restrained.” The occupying power can never claim to be restrained in its policies, for any operations aimed at controlling lands beyond its recognized borders, any policies aimed at quashing resistance to its illegal and immoral occupation, and any policies aimed at collectively punishing an entire people for an ad hoc war waged by some is antithetical to restraint. Were Israel to desire peace and restraint, it would begin by dismantling illegal settlements on non-Israeli lands, by scuttling policies of annexation and administering foreign lands, by treating the Palestinian people in a humane fashion, by doing that which encourages peace rather than foment violent resistance. And, before you get all reflexive in your rebuttal, I’ll inform you that I’ve spent time in Israel, Gaza, the West Bank and neighboring countries. Don’t waste your breathe trying to argue thoroughly debunked talking-points about Israeli probity and Arab rejectionism, for I’ve seen the truth with my own two eyes. My sympathies are with the occupied, not the occupiers.

“Prior to the creation of Israel, these lands were under overwhelming Muslim control for 1300 years, with only a very miniscule Jewish minority.”

.
And prior to the invasion and occupation of this land by the Arabs it was controlled by Jews who were subjected to the occupation of the Romans and Greeks before that time. But, Jewish roots in this area run deep despite all of your rant to the contrary. Over 5,000 years of invasions, subsequent expulsion / enslavement, and most recently Arab / Muslim invasion for the basis of your “1300 years of occupation”.
.
I know history is a poor subject for most liberals, and mis-guided so-called “Conservatives”. When the truth does not bolster their version of history, liberals and mis-guided conservatives invent or rewrite it. But, truth is truth, and historical facts are facts. Whether for the past “1300 years” Arabs have controlled this land or not still does not justify their invasion and occupation 1300 years ago. Man has for thouands of years invaded and taken lands from others. Man will probably continue to do so in the future, if we use history as a predictor. But, in 1948, men did recognize Jewish rights to this land. Land that was never sovereign by any “Palestinian Arabs”, ever. We can however look at the historical record and find many Jewish Kings who did have sovereinty over these lands for thousands of years before the hordes of Arabs descended upon this land to occupy it.
.
So despite your repulsion to the Jews for now being the sovereign rulers of this land, I am also just as repulsed by the 1300 years prior to that the Arabs occupied this land. Ultimately God will most likely be the judge as to which one of us is correct.

NFB~
Your sense of relativity seems askew. Justifying contemporary actions on the basis of 1300 year old transgressions is a dangerous game that would seemingly justify perpetual war to right wrongs centuries old. I’m not revising anything, I concede that Muslim armies swept through the Middle East and did, in fact, conquer Jewish lands. That was the way the world worked at that time. You cannot come back 1300 years later and say, we have a right to these lands and simply disavow its current inhabitants who had nothing to do with those ancient conquests. Are the American Indians entitled to overthrow the US government and take back America? Are blacks entitled to seek reparations from whites who were not alive during times of slavery in the US? I suspect your answer would be ‘no’ in both of those scenarios.
~
I’m not repulsed at Jewish sovereignty over the lands of Israel, contrary to your feeble attempt to inject some malicious motivation on my part. I’m repulsed that Israel continues to operate an occupation beyond the borders of Israel on lands that are not soveriegn to Israel. You see, NFB, I deal with situations as they exist. Israel exists. Just as I think it was immoral for Zionist immigrants to arrive in Palestine and uproot a people, I think it equally immoral to uproot Israelis from Israel, as they are now a demographic reality, many of whom took no part in the initial creation of the state of Israel. I accept Israel as a soverign nation. I do not accept Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, nor it’s continued policies of annexation and occupation. That’s where we differ. You accept everything Israel does as justified because of past grievances, whereas I look at human actions as singularly beholden to well-entrenched codes of morality. There’s no moral justification for Israel’s Palestinian policy.
~
As recently as 2005, I was staunchly pro-Israel, a truth that blows your charges of Anti-Semitism out of the water. I saw Israel as a beleaguered nation fighting for its very existence. I heard the calls for a right to defend itself and a right to exist, and I thought to myself, of course. Surely, Israel should not stand defenseless whilst encircled by enemies. Still reeling from the near-death of my uncle in the attacks on the WTC, I allowed my anger to rationalize heavy-handed policies when fighting against the scourge of terrorism. I majored in Political Science, minoring in Security Studies, and I devoted myself to studying radical Islam accepting a fellowship with the very pro-Israel DC-based counter-terrorism thinktank, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. I travelled to Israel to undertake a case-study of Israeli security policies in the summer of 2006. This is when everything changed for me. It’s very easy to justify heavy-handedness from the comfort of an American classroom, far less so when faced with the realities of human suffering on a day-by-day basis, tangible suffering that you can reach out and touch and see with your very own eyes. During 12-hour days at Tel-Aviv University, I became increasingly unsettled by the chauvinistic seminars by IDF, Shin Bet, Mossad, and government officials. They were presenting two narratives that I could not reconcile. On the one hand, they were stressing the vulnerability of Israel to myriad threats, the overwhelming odds they faced, the daily battle that all Israelis deal with, living in terror and anxiety of annihilation. On the other hand, they gloated about their military prowess, their sheer superiority, and the feckless ineptitude of their Arab counterparts. These seeming contradictions were accentuated by the daily media reports (Israeli media) documenting the death and carnage being waged against Lebanon and in Gaza by the IDF, while Tel-Aviv remained a bustling, thriving, upbeat city. The nightlife was enthralling, with packed restaurants, pubs, and nightclubs, Israeli girls in miniskirts and American tourists as far as the eye could see. The piers in North Tel-Aviv remained awash in youthful party-goers well into the night, while one could recede to Jaffa for a more quiet ambience, with candle lit restaurants awaiting the more romantically inclined. Hardly the picture of an embattled people fighting for their very survival. Over the course of several more weeks, I was steadily exposed to more and more of the harsh realities of Israel’s policies, as the misthruths of Israel’s propaganda become all the more evident. In a Jewish settlement near Ramallah I saw first hand the immoral disparity between security and standards of living for the Jewish residents and the Arab residents, this despite the fact that we were on Arab lands, i.e. the West Bank. Again, in Jerusalem, I saw the symptoms of occupation, the matured emptiness in the eyes of otherwise youthful Palestinian children, the dilapidated conditions in East Jerusalem, the constant presence of Israeli soldiers at every turn, harrassing and haranguing local Arab vendors, that is until they noticed foreigners in their midst. They clearly have two fronts, one the reality, and one they try to show the world. But, occupation is a nasty business, and you simply cannot hide it anymore. Something I’ve come to realize, most poignantly in my travels throughout Israel and the West Bank. I could go on detailing my visit to an Israeli prison near Jerusalem where I interviewed imprisoned members of Hamas, Fatah, and Islamic Jihad, or my experiences crossing the border into the West Bank. I could passionately convey my heartbreaking return to the region to volunteer in Gaza in 2007, an experience that still leaves me in absolute shock at the world’s inhumanity. But, to what end? For you are secure in your conviction, NFB, as I was once, and nothing but reality can alter those perceptions. All the rhetoric, all the textbooks, all the media hype and bloviated discourse are meaningless. Reality is reality, and until you actually see it, you’ll never know it.

40 years, 1300 years or 5000 years ago, occupation of land in the world has occurred. Armies have marched millions upon millions of miles in conquest of other people’s lands, the enslavement of people, and in the worst cases in human history the near total annihiliation of specific groups of humans that have occupied those lands. For what purpose? Greed.
.
Whether it was yesterday or One Million eight hundred twenty five thousand yesterdays, peace in the middle east will never occur, and no Arab Palestinian will feel safe and secure in their own homeland unless they fully recognize Israel’s right to those lands appropriated to them in 1948. Until Palestinians sit down at a table and sign an agreement to recognize Israel’s right to their land, you or Obama will never succeed in this matter.
.
Until people like Ahmadenijad, and the rest of his terrorist friends also recognizes Israel’s right to exist there will never be any peace in this region of the World. No one, not Israelis, Palestinian, Jew, or Arab will ever have any semblence of peace until they can finally accept what has happened in the past, acknowledge each others’ rights and move on. I am not naive to think it will ever happen in my lifetime or the lifetimes of many genereations to come after us, if it even lasts that long.
.
For all the left’s diatribe to denouce the US’s role in nation building elsewhere in the world, they then counter their own words by calling for a Palestinian State. As you go back 1300 years to justify your point, I can go back 5000 years to justify mine. This is my point, and what I addressed in my initial argument.
.
Perhaps Israel is defiant in their continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza because they have the need and desire to have a buffer zone between their cities you describe and the murderous Arabs who wish them all dead. The unfortunate Palestinians are simply in between the two warring factions. With the constant and continued attacks by Arabs against Jews, I am not surprised they have the policies in place you describe, and encourage them to continue to do so until the Palestinians choose to act civilized.
.
And to counter your other claim that I wouldn’t be in favor of a “Native run” sovereign United Natives of America land, you are wrong. I would be 100% in favor of taking Federal Land within the borders of the US and giving it back and acknowledge their sovereignty.
.
So far as the blacks are concerned. No I would not give them one more nickle. They for the most part as a group have been receiving “reparations” since they were freed to this date albeit in the form of welfare and social justice payments. Not to mention at the time they were given reparations of 40 acres and a mule. More than any of my native relatives ever received from the US of A.

NFB:
.
I agree with most of your facts in your post, however not with your conclusions. I agree that Israel is in fact the Jewish homeland, given to them by God. However, that land has been occupied throughout history, most recently by Muslims. I agree that Israel has shown must restraint when it has come to the attacks from the Palestinians. However, Israel has continued to terrorize the Palestinian people and take their land and homes. They are not the absolute innocent party in that region.
.
And yes, Israel has been a key ally for us in that region since their existence in 1948, however their insistence to continue to build settlements in the West Bank demonstrates that they may not be the ally that you suggest. Obama, and Bush, repeatedly asked the Israeli government to cease construction but they have refused. I assume however that you believe this land to belong solely to the Israelis, which is a different argument all together.
.
I am also in agreement that we do not need more nuclear weapons in the world. However, have you considered that Ahmadinejad (and Khamenei) wish to obtain a nuclear weapon to counter Israel? It is very difficult to know their intentions absolutely. If Iran is able to develop nuclear weapons and do indeed bomb Israel there will certainly be repercussions. Do you believe that the rest of the world, and certainly the area, would not retaliate? I am not suggesting it is in the global interest for Iran to have such weapons, I am just stating that your conclusion that Iran would certainly bomb Israel is suspect.
.
Finally, I understand that you believe liberals to be atheist but that is not always the case. I do view myself as a liberal, but I am also a devout Catholic. You may not have a favorable view of Catholicism as many of the Protestants that I know do not. However, I do have strong beliefs in the same God that you worship. And I apologize if I have offended you by assuming that you are a Christian, it is implied from your posts.

NFB~
.
After reading your “rebuttal,” it’s painfully obvious that my words ring true. I’ll therefore repeat them:
.
For you are secure in your conviction, NFB, as I was once, and nothing but reality can alter those perceptions. All the rhetoric, all the textbooks, all the media hype and bloviated discourse are meaningless. Reality is reality, and until you actually see it, you’ll never know it.

Jerikko,
.
NFB believes everyone he disagrees with to be a godless liberal. I’m staunchly conservative, and a devout Catholic. I try to support the dissposessed and reviled, which in this case is the Palestinians, not the Israelis. But, nevermind any of that, to NFB, I’m in the same camp as Obama, simply because I repudiate the policies of bombing our way through every problem.

Exiled,
.
As a long time reader of Swampland I must give you credit for your viewpoints and you communicate them. I understand this blog to get heated at times, but I appreciate those that can disagree without being disagreeable. You and I more than likely disagree on most issues, but being able to have intelligent arguments helps to keep the discourse tolerable.

Just a thought on the original subject, i.e. Iran. But actually, more on the West and the US as a leading Western power. The fact that the West abandoned the very possibility to really engage in war in order to win brings about the situation in which the best of minds like those taking part in this discussion and elsewhere are trying to square the circle. It is obvious that the sanctions will be non-productive concerning the goal of preventing Iran to go nuclear, but most probably will end in the West losing the face and disgracefully rescinding once, for example, the Iranians start showing pictures of starving children etc (that they might produce themselves for the propaganda purposes – pictures or/and children). While the bombing can be directed not only against nuclear installations, but military bases, “revolutionary” guards and so on. This will most probably bring the regime to bend, or to downfall. Serbia was bombed into submission for murderous and immoral but much less threatening behavour. The point is the West is not really ready to fight for its own culture.
As to Israel that has been brought into this discussion. First, if something seems to be advantageous to Israel, it doesn’t mean the thing is altogether wrong. This situation happened during the WWII, when the Western powers, US first and foremost, abstained from actions in order to distance herself from being seen as acting to the advantage of the Jews. In historic perspective, it was not only morally wrong, but resulted in additional war burden afterwards. Second, Exiled – it for you – what you mentioned as Israel punishing the civil population is a result of the same syndrome of the self-imposed impossibility or unacceptability to wage a decisive war when justified, and against military and governmental objects (In Israel’s case Arafat and his battalions had to be wiped out back in 2000 the moment he unleashed the terror war). As things are developing, the West as such will have to defend its very throat no sooner than when brought to the extreme.
As we are told, the history doesn’t repeat itself. But I’ll dare to rephrase: it does repeat, however not in specifics but in very broad patterns reflecting the human nature: the inability to act before it is late.

Jerikko~
~
Thank you for your kind words. I do strive to have honest, intelligent discussions here. That’s why I continue to read and to comment. God knows that I have been less than civil myself on some occasions, usually when confronted with individuals whose sole purpose here is to incite, not to debate. However, NFB and others who seem at least moderately interested in debate are people I try to be civil with, regardless of how strongly I disgree with them, no matter how reprehensible I sometimes find their positions to be. My intention is to provide others with a new perspective, in the hope that they might learn to understand it. That goal is undermined by incivility, for I cannot hope for anyone to care what I have to say if I say what I say while hurling infantile insults.

Beng,
Is this some strange spin on the meme that “they hate us for our freedom, for our way of life?” We (Americans, Israelis) are hated for our arrogant intervention all across the Middle East and our policies that undermine stability. We’re not hated because of how we choose to live within the confines of our own soveriegn borders. Bin Laden’s 1998 Fatwah that largely precipitated global jihad specifically cited American presence in the Middle East as a just rationale for relentless war against the US. No mention was made of our culture or values. I’m guessing you still haven’t taken me up on my reading recommendation, “A Concise History of the Middle East,” by Arthur Goldschmidt, Jr.

Damn Exiled, B.O couldn’t have said it better himself!
.
America is bad!

Exiled certainly has the same feelings towards the U.S. as OBL. Who says liberals hate this country?

No, 2/3, America is simply fallible. We make mistakes, many mistakes, and these mistakes have very real consequences. It’s not unpatriotic or liberal to question the soundness of American polices.
~
I’m getting just slightly irritated with this common theme running amok among many of my fellow conservatives, you know, the one that suggests you have to be an imposing, jingoistic assh*le to be conservative. According to NFB, I’m a misguided conservative. Is that because I speak about morality, yet don’t throw moral conduct out the window when it comes to our dealings with foreign nations or the actions of our military abroad? Is it because I stand for limited government, yet don’t make exceptions for unneccessary expansions in military spending or crackdowns on civil liberties under the guise of national security? True conservatism does not make exceptions for misguided nationalism. It is you, and your fellow neoconservative ilk, that are clearly misguided in your conservative leanings. You’re statists, at least when the GOP has power, and rabble-rousing populists when the Democratic Party has power. You’re all over the f*ckin’ map!

Bin Laden argues that American military presence in the Middle East is grounds for attacking any Americans, civilian or military, anywhere they can be attacked. You’re a fool if you think that is the position I have been taking here. I was merely pointing out that we’re not hated because of our values or culture, but rather our policies. Never once did I say that we deserved to be attacked for our policies. I know this is difficult for you to understand, but to assuage threats one must accurately understand them. If we keep pushing this tired narrative about being hated for our freedoms, without ever examining the impact of our policies, we’ll be faced with the threat of global terrorism forever. I, for one, would rather get to the root of the matter, rather than running around in circles chasing some false clash of civilizations. You seem to prefer endless war. Who’s more patriotic?

Covert activities, SO covert that only the NYT Time magazine know! That’s pretty damn covert!
.
Either you just blew the whistle some sweet covert ops, or someone is making this up. I’m pretty sure the Iranian government has a better idea of what’s going on in Iran than the NYT or Joe Klein of Time Magazine.
.
If they actually don’t; thanks to you both for getting our operatives killed and blowing those ops that they now know exist thanks to you.

Exiled:
.
Clearly we screwed up with OBL, giving him CIA assistance against the Soviets and then leaving him high and dry. That, however is the nature of U.S. politics, not every administration follows through on all the programs of the previous. I thought that was pretty much the point of electing Obama; to stop the retarded policies of GWB?
.
That said, he does have a pretty good reason to be pissed at us for what we did to him and his men.
.
On the other hand his major problem with us is our stationing of troops in Saudi Arabia because of it’s Islamic holy sites. A policy he didn’t seem to have a problem with until 1990/1991 when we stationed large numbers of troops there to prepare to liberate Kuwait and attack Iraq. Troops the Saudis ASKED us for, because they knew they had the airstrips they needed and were scared out of their pants that Saddam would attack them next for their oil fields, an armored attack they knew they couldn’t deal with without outside assistance. And the only country in the region that might be able to do so they hate (Iran) who didn’t have the ability to move tanks in enough numbers to defend them anyway.

There are no Valerie Plame-style details either here or at the linked NYT piece.

Sasquatch,
I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. OBL certainly has good cause to make enemies with the United States. That’s what I’ve been saying. Though, I’d like to think that you didn’t construe that to mean I support his war on the United States, and certainly not that I support his war against American civilians. That’s the logic coming from husein11, though. Patently ridiculous.
~
Obviously it comes with the territory of democracy that leadership will change, and therefore policies will adjust. This can sometimes lead to broken promises. However, if each administration examined the effects of policies, potential disasters could be offset. Just because policies morph with new administrations doesn’t mean that we can never have sound policies in place for some time. It doesn’t help though, that we have so many people in leadership positions under the impression that our policies have no consequences and we’ll be hated no matter what we do. I thoroughly reject that position.

Exiled:
.
Apparently you do agree, in that he has good cause to make enemies with the U.S., which is exactly what I said. I never said nor did I think anything about you condoning or supporting his actions against U.S. military personnel or civilians, much less construe it to others. If they think that they’re reading words that aren’t there. If you think I did you’re doing the same.
.
I never said that we “can never have sound policies”. I merely stated that we didn’t in regard to support of Bin Laden in his war against the Soviet occupation. My intended meaning being that we should have had a clear and consistent policy on him and his people. Either we should have supported them to the hilt against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan or we should never have gotten involved. You can’t declare you’re friends with a group one day/month/year and then leave them to fight or die on their own (Israel?) the next. My problem is with having multiple administrations that have no freaking clue what they are doing, one gets involved in something and “breaks it” then another refuses to “buy it” and you end up with Osama hating us when he should either not care about us or be an ally we could use. Instead, we leave him hanging in the middle of a war and he has good damn reason to hate us after its over, as do his men.
.
Clearly you are correct, we will not be hated by everyone no matter what we do, but we will be hated by some no matter what we do. Therein lies the problem; too many politicians in this country act like the U.S. is running for prom king (or Queen in a few years when China bends us over if we keep going down the road of spending money we don’t have). Sometimes we’ll be forced to do things that really hack off some people, but no matter what we do we’ll always hack some people off. We need to learn to give the finger to people when needed and placate them when needed, i.e. a balance. We shouldn’t go out to piss of the world all the time, but neither should we sit on our laurels when action is needed because France or Russia or China or some other country might get mad about it because we go gangster on a country that deserves it like Iran. There is a time and place for hardball, and I fear that after Vietnam we lost the ability or willingness to play it to some extent. An extent which was furthered by a war we shouldn’t have entered into in Iraq (but that’s a whole other topic).
.
Thanks for being civil, unlike some of the people on here who just want to scream at someone.

Wow Time, you need some IT professionals stat based on the fact I replied to my own posting and started a new thread, and the fact that 17.1 showed up 5 times on another topic.

My post to you was more of an elaboration on your views, not a rebuttal. I wasn’t trying to come off as if I thought that you were saying sound policies were impossible. I was taking your thoughts on broken promises and adding my own thoughts on the subject. Thanks for responding.