tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post6745363243666640651..comments2024-03-19T08:03:39.938-05:00Comments on Althouse: "The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights."Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger95125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-2450377934836230722009-06-22T10:32:22.203-05:002009-06-22T10:32:22.203-05:00I like all of Jim's three options, especially ...I like all of Jim's three options, especially the first with its added symbolic reversal of the crimes committed against the U.S. embassy in Teheran and its American diplomats 30 years ago. <br /><br />Time for Obama to reach deep and tap into his inner Reagan.Meadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00117933390338651739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-74662038783881636362009-06-22T09:10:23.955-05:002009-06-22T09:10:23.955-05:00Jim, those are three good things - but the second ...Jim, those are three good things - but the second one may be impossible. We'll have to see what transpires. The first one has been in the "tweeting" going on from Iran, and it seems the militia simply surround the embassies and arrest or attack protestors trying to get to them, so that's not so good. I like the third option.Bethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16774002797359859550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-15817208990045548322009-06-22T02:42:05.767-05:002009-06-22T02:42:05.767-05:00Beth -
Not that I'm advocating an invasion o...Beth - <br /><br />Not that I'm advocating an invasion or even the use of military force in Iran, but you asked a hypothetical that I think deserves an answer:<br /><br />What good could an exercise of American military force do the Iranian protesters?<br /><br />As we demonstrated on the first night of the invasion of Iraq, the combined logistical command of the US military is extraordinarily efficient at knocking out the command and control centers of an opposing country.<br /><br />Right now, the balance of power favors the mullahs because they have the ability to move forces at will and can coordinate strategic attacks on the protesters. They have superior armaments, and the advantage of their military training.<br /><br />Again assuming the hypothetical, in even a single evening the US is fully capable of wiping out the vast majority of the mullah's power base through the use of stealth aircraft, Predators and Tomahawk missiles. No invasion. Just some surgical bombing at known military or government sites. Not only would it destroy a good deal of the mullah's ability to attack protesters, it would also create utter chaos in the command structure of the mullah's in power.<br /><br />An invasion is a "last resort" of military options. There are a whole lot of other options available which could be precisely targeted and have far greater strategic value than an overland invasion would risk.<br /><br />Just something to think about.<br /><br />As far as other options that don't include the military that are within the grasp of the US:<br /><br />1) Encourage countries with embassies in Iran to take in the wounded protesters so they don't wind up getting arrested when they're taken to the hospital.<br />2) Publicly announce that the US will not negotiate with the current government of Iran even if it succeeds in putting down the protesters. There is widespread agreement that, given what has transpired in Iran - even if you completely put aside their past history of abrogating treaties and terror-sponsorship - no negotiations are possible with this regime that could produce any results that they could be trusted to live up to anyway. Engaging in sham negotiations for the sake of being able to say that you're negotiating are worse than not talking at all. So it would cost us nothing to say so upfront while sending a strong signal to protestors.<br />3) Requesting that a meeting of the UN Security Council be held to discuss real sanctions against the current regime if they don't immediately cease hostilities against their own people. This includes blocking gasoline shipments: Iran has plenty of oil, but no capacity to refine it into gasoline. The protesters are effectively pinned down without the ability to travel by the government anyway. The ones who would be most hurt by this would be the mullahs who would no longer be able to transport Hezbollah and Hamas thugs from place to place.<br /><br />All 3 of these items could be initiated tomorrow if Obama were serious about supporting the protestors. It would cost this country nothing, and yet say everything to the protestors (and the regime).<br /><br />I came up with these 3 off the top of my head as I was composing this post. Surely all the foreign policy "experts" that Obama has at his disposal could come up with similar ideas and a much longer list over the week that this has been going on. Don't you think?Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17143782473850677784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-56632817526566210552009-06-21T21:36:30.119-05:002009-06-21T21:36:30.119-05:00Thanks, Meade. Yes, sorta less oblique. I am not p...Thanks, Meade. Yes, sorta less oblique. I am not persuaded that our invasion of Iraq was meaningfully comparable to our liberation of Europe, so we diverge there and after that, I'm not sure what the point is.<br /><br />I don't think Obama has done anything to indicate that our military is not an option in any event, anywhere, anytime, so I won't assume there aren't discussions underway. But I seriously doubt that invading Iran would be the right approach - how would that help the protestors? Do you think they want us to do that? <br /><br />I'd like to hear more passion from Obama, and from other Western leaders, and I'd like to know that we have more options - for example, what about economic sanctions, or is it wise right now to hold our cards a little close to the vest? I don't know, and I suspect most of us don't know, despite bellicose and romantic avowals about Reagan and Bush and whomever.Bethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16774002797359859550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-48822995338481271652009-06-21T18:37:30.279-05:002009-06-21T18:37:30.279-05:001jpb,
Do you actually believe this revolution/ref...1jpb,<br /><br />Do you actually believe this revolution/reformation in Iran is all to do with Obama? Do you think Iranians are stupid? Were they not paying attention to the conversation Ahmadi was having with a Bush led U.S.? Did they not see Saddam Hussein fall at the hands of liberated Iraqis?Lylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09082051710068390275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-5420274977750451162009-06-21T18:35:40.526-05:002009-06-21T18:35:40.526-05:001jpb,
Do you actually believe this revolution/ref...1jpb,<br /><br />Do you actually believe this revolution/reformation in Iran is all to do with Obama? Do you think Iranians are stupid? Were they not paying attention to the conversation Ahmadi was having with a Bush led U.S.? Did they not see Saddam Hussein fall at the hands of liberated Iraqis?Lylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09082051710068390275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-47959725510852764422009-06-21T18:12:34.271-05:002009-06-21T18:12:34.271-05:00Beth: Thanks for asking.
No, not equivalent bu...Beth: Thanks for asking. <br /><br />No, not equivalent but comparable in that all invasions share the element of using military force. <br /><br />Allied military force in 1944 didn't prove anything beyond the defeat of the Axis. Obviously, it wasn't a good idea for members of the Axis. Some people such as Patrick Buchanan believe it wasn't a good idea for the United States either. I disagree.<br /><br />I was just pushing Jeremy back. I'm sure Saddam would believe the use of military force against his regime wasn't a good idea. Jeremy seems to believe it wasn't a good idea for the United States either. I disagree. <br /><br />I also disagree with Henry Kissinger on the sufficiency of Obama's rhetoric regarding current events in Iran. I'd like to hear him express stronger solidarity with the people of Iran who are in rebellion against the theocratic tyranny of the mullahs.<br /><br />But no, I'm not arguing that Obama <i>should</i> be planning to invade Iran right now. He should, however, be taking necessary steps to never rule out the use of military force if military force is needed to prevent genocide or if military force is the key to securing human and civil rights. <br /><br />Otherwise, Obama might someday find himself making further apologies for American (in)action similar to Clinton's apology for failing the people of Rwanda in 1994.<br /><br />As JFK could easily have said: Pacifism in the appeasement of tyranny is no virtue. And military force in the defense of liberty and human freedom is no vice.<br /><br />I hope I've been less oblique.Meadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00117933390338651739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-61645730311283466312009-06-21T16:58:31.788-05:002009-06-21T16:58:31.788-05:00Meade, I'm not following you. Are all invasion...Meade, I'm not following you. Are all invasions comparable? We invaded France in 1944, so that proves invading Iraq in 2003 was a good idea? And what does either tell us now? Are you arguing that Obama should be gearing up to invade Iran right now? You're being somewhat oblique.Bethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16774002797359859550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-77263089669465998792009-06-21T14:27:26.961-05:002009-06-21T14:27:26.961-05:00We do?
Why? Did someone bring up Bushitler again...We do?<br /><br />Why? Did someone bring up Bushitler again?Meadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00117933390338651739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-66338375481449445062009-06-21T14:13:09.357-05:002009-06-21T14:13:09.357-05:00We have a Goodwin's Law winner, or is that los...We have a Goodwin's Law winner, or is that loser?Sprezzaturahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14859397164637821056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-32471644746057967002009-06-21T14:05:04.245-05:002009-06-21T14:05:04.245-05:00Jeremy said...
"Bush would have already had u...Jeremy said...<br />"Bush would have already had us knee-deep in an invasion or worse."<br /><br />Or worse?<br /><br />But what could be worse than an invasion (and its subsequent overthrow of a genocidal regime intent on acquiring weapons of mass destruction, sworn mortal enemy of the US and allies, and supporter of suicide bombers)? Is it possible that no invasion of Iraq could have been worse? No invasion of France in 1944. No invasion of South Carolina in 1861. Where would we be if LBJ had not committed federal troops to Alabama on March 20, 1965? <br /><br />How much longer would the arc of the moral universe be today? And when would it have begun bending toward justice?Meadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00117933390338651739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-74181005897918236582009-06-21T14:04:28.212-05:002009-06-21T14:04:28.212-05:00Sorry, I just think criticism of this type is pett...<i>Sorry, I just think criticism of this type is petty and trivial</i>.<br /><br />Current technology makes DC practically obsolete, but of course, face-to-face arm twisting will never go out of fashion.bearbeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04770545814913465196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-24496851570213201722009-06-21T13:35:52.542-05:002009-06-21T13:35:52.542-05:00Jason,
In truth I completely agree w/ you. Thank...Jason,<br /><br />In truth I completely agree w/ you. Thank you for noticing that I wasn't presenting a scientifically acceptable cause and effect analysis. I'm guessing that you also realize the BHO attackers' (e.g. Mr. Bomb Iran, Pence, et. al.) assertions that BHO can positively effect the situation in Iran by raising the heat of his jabber is also lacking scientific causality. <br /><br />But, it is fun to look at history and see actions that were coincident w/ the Bush administrations actions related to Iran. You probably remember how Bush strongly took the side of the protesters in 2003, this was after plenty of tough axis of evil talk, and the freeing of Iraq which were supposed to weaken the Iranian government. How did that work out for the protesters? Who became president of Iran after Bush's jabber and Iraq attack? What has happened w/ the Iranian enrichment program and support for terrorism in Iraq and Israel since the Iraq attack and tough talk? Has the new Iraqi government shown more respect for Iranian leaders than the Bush administration at the exact time when the Iranians were arming terrorist who were killing Americans in Iraq? <br /><br />Likewise it is interesting to look at the things in Iran that have accompanied BHO's rejection of the bluster of Mr. Bomb Iran, Pence, et. al.. At a minimum things have been less comfortable for the Iranian leadership since BHO took over. <br /><br />It's not possible to calculate a statistical causality. But, there is a clear historical narrative that justifies mocking Lyle et. al. who claim that the eight years of Iranian activity during the Bush years were not creditable to Bush. But, supposedly the current circumstances in Iran are the result of Bush. According to Lyle the axis of evil speech is ripening and really taking full effect now. <br /><br />Heh.Sprezzaturahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14859397164637821056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-20730808060388664652009-06-21T13:11:13.553-05:002009-06-21T13:11:13.553-05:00If it weren't Obama, would you still care abou...If it weren't Obama, would you still care about the ice cream?reader_iamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17352836883752091339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-14443158800138062972009-06-21T13:08:20.543-05:002009-06-21T13:08:20.543-05:00If Obama had made the speech you wanted earlier th...If Obama had made the speech you wanted earlier this week, would you still be up in arms about the ice cream?reader_iamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17352836883752091339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-65804627667613475932009-06-21T13:06:51.613-05:002009-06-21T13:06:51.613-05:00PatCa: Your comment reminded me of all those who c...PatCa: Your comment reminded me of all those who complained about Bush going on vacation, or spending time away from the WH, because of all the various crises going on. I think all the kind of stuff is pretty silly. I mean, these people are POTUS, & there's ALWAYS stuff going on in the world. Should we just chain whoever gets elected to the presidency to their desk for the length of their terms?<br /><br />Sorry, I just think criticism of this type is petty and trivial.reader_iamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17352836883752091339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-69814574176827678232009-06-21T11:14:26.257-05:002009-06-21T11:14:26.257-05:00Meade,
No wonder Ann loves you.Meade,<br /><br />No wonder Ann loves you.bagoh20https://www.blogger.com/profile/10915174575358413637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-6791973750432412432009-06-21T10:31:21.651-05:002009-06-21T10:31:21.651-05:00@Cederford
Whatever the Iraq war was about, it wa...@Cederford<br /><br />Whatever the Iraq war was about, it wasn't for Israel. If you wanted to do something for Israel you'd do something else.<br /><br />Israel's closer enemies were a lot more dangerous than Saddam was.<br /><br />Do you believe Bush thought it was for Israel? If so, why do you think so?Your Correspondent https://www.blogger.com/profile/17440467058108985654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-38910466122028511882009-06-21T10:20:38.374-05:002009-06-21T10:20:38.374-05:00Obama should be doing more; Probably helping stimu...Obama should be doing more; Probably helping stimulate international support for the Iranian reformers.<br /><br />The US and UN can definitely stop Iran's development of nuclear weapons, with sanctions. The puzzle is why Russia and China are oppposed to this.<br /><br />If the reformers win, the nuclear weapons issue could become a non-problem. This would be a blessing for all humanity.<br /><br />And yes, the US could stop the nuclear war that Khamenei seems to want by bombing some of the nuclear facilities.<br /><br />True, you'd have to re-bomb every 4 years or so until Iran got the message. But it's doable with much less than 1% of the deaths of any nuclear exchange.<br /><br />The alternative may be a nuclear first strike by either Israel or Iran. Not good. So root for the reformers; it may be a chance for peace.Your Correspondent https://www.blogger.com/profile/17440467058108985654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-21494446547771196562009-06-21T09:10:03.045-05:002009-06-21T09:10:03.045-05:00The refreezing of the Prague Spring.The refreezing of the Prague Spring.Ralph Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07915708905660273961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-72912630876555511932009-06-21T08:31:46.802-05:002009-06-21T08:31:46.802-05:00@Randy, thanks....fair to say protests to Soviet i...@Randy, thanks....fair to say protests to Soviet invasion/crackdown on liberalizing efforts?bearbeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04770545814913465196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-55719149457065334772009-06-21T08:27:35.268-05:002009-06-21T08:27:35.268-05:001jpb,
Bush didn't have to deal with Amadi unt...1jpb,<br /><br />Bush didn't have to deal with Amadi until Amadi was elected. The fact that Iran is revolting has more to do with Bush than Obama. Obama is like the cherry on top, but Amadi's anti-Western stick was long seen through by the Iranian diaspora and many Iranians in Iran. Only now, with a Amadi having to be re-elected could a moment like this have come about. It's just happening on Obama's watch, much like the Berlin Wall happened on Bush I's watch.Lylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09082051710068390275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-65496695566184449982009-06-21T08:10:19.500-05:002009-06-21T08:10:19.500-05:00bearbee: Just a minor note of clarification: there...bearbee: Just a minor note of clarification: there was no uprising in Czechoslovakia in 1967. There was a Warsaw Pact invasion on August 20-21, 1968.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03071928294799081845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-15139612303761692882009-06-21T06:59:46.997-05:002009-06-21T06:59:46.997-05:00And speaking of George H.W. Bush, how did he handl...<i>And speaking of George H.W. Bush, how did he handle the equivalent of the students' seeking democracy in Iran, the Chinese students seeking democracy in Tiananmen Square</i>?<br /><br />Many times the US, at least overtly, did not, could not, intervene in popular riots, revolts, uprisings, protests. A few:<br /><br />1956 Uprising Hungary<br />1967 Uprising Czechoslovakia <br />1991 Iraq<br />1999 Iran<br />Numerous in various African countries during the 20th century<br />2007 Burma protests<br />2008 Tibet<br /><br />If government-backed violence escalates against protesting Iranians, will the US and other governments petition and demand UN sanctions?bearbeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04770545814913465196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-18405299743094246322009-06-21T05:39:00.019-05:002009-06-21T05:39:00.019-05:00F15C said...
...the poster shows Gary Cooper as ...F15C said... <br /><br /><i>...the poster shows Gary Cooper as the lonely sheriff in the American Western, "High Noon." Under the headline "At High Noon" runs the red Solidarity banner and the<br />date -- June 4, 1989 -- of the poll</i>.<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:W_samo_poludnie_4_6_89-Tomasz_Sarnecki.jpg" rel="nofollow"> At High Noon Solidarity Poster</a>bearbeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04770545814913465196noreply@blogger.com