Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bad Ideas For Stopping Iran
The New York Post ^ | February 21, 2006 | AMIR TAHERI

Posted on 02/21/2006 5:20:25 AM PST by TheForceOfOne

FOOLISH FORCE VS. DUMB DIPLOMACY HAVING resumed uranium enrichment, has the Islamic Republic crossed the Rubicon?

The question is dividing commentators and decision makers both inside and outside Iran.

Some, like former Vice President Al Gore, believe that the Islamic Republic is a threat to world peace and must be checked, by force if necessary. Others — like Gore's former boss, ex-President Bill Clinton — are convinced that the best way to deal with Iran is to negotiate.

Yet both may be missing the point.

If military action means a few brief airstrikes or missile attacks, it is certain to be counterproductive.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad might even welcome such attacks in the hope that they would lift the uncertainty that is damaging the Iranian economy and undermining his authority. And he would not be wrong.

(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: amirtaheri; iraq; mrtaheri; taheri; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last
To: TheForceOfOne

Some very significant points :

"The new Tehran leadership is flattered by the fact that the United States is treating it as an almost equal adversary, rather than a ramshackle Third World regime."

"Tehran would like nothing better than a resumption of talks with the International atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in exchange for postponing any action by the Security Council."
Overall, the Tehran leadership wants to keep the focus on the nuclear issue. This could win the regime a measure of popular support inside Iran, where most people do not know what the fuss is about and resent being treated as "less than the Indians" when it comes to having nuclear weapons. At the same time, exclusive attention to the nuclear issue keeps the limelight off of other, potentially more explosive issues — such as violation of human rights, waves of executions and ethnic unrest in many parts of Iran."

"The Iranian analysis is based on the belief that the current U.S. strategy is the product of "a moment of madness" under George W Bush." It assumes that Bush's actions are out of character for an American president and that, once he is out of office, his successor, whoever it is, will revert to the traditional American policy of "conflict avoidance" and "alliance building" for soft-power action.

All the talk in Tehran (and, by extension, in Damascus, since the Islamic Republic has now established itself as the principal supporter of the Syrian regime) is about "the three-year endurance course" — that is, what is left of Bush's final term in office."



"Ahmadinejad mocks the major powers for their "obsession with passing resolutions."

"They just don't get it," he told an audience in Bushehr earlier this month. "They think that because they pass a resolution everyone is obliged to obey them. Our message is simple: Pass resolutions until you are blue in the face! We are guided by what the Hidden Imam tells us, not what you dictate in your resolutions."


21 posted on 02/21/2006 5:42:22 AM PST by nuconvert ([there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

In a nutshell, conventional warfare with Iran is on the horizon IMHO. He knows we are tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan and thinks we cannot attack before he can threaten nuclear retaliation, regardless of whether or not he would survive such a stupid tactic.

He isn't afraid of us, he wants a showdown, and he'll get it.


22 posted on 02/21/2006 5:48:10 AM PST by TheForceOfOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Or one enraged Chuck Norris ...


23 posted on 02/21/2006 6:06:52 AM PST by ChiefJayStrongbow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ChiefJayStrongbow

Send Dick Cheney on a hunting trip.


24 posted on 02/21/2006 6:07:55 AM PST by cripplecreek (Never a minigun handy when you need one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
A very good definition of a rogue state: " Our message is simple: Pass resolutions until you are blue in the face! We are guided by what the Hidden Imam tells us, not what you dictate in your resolutions."

Now the real question is whether Condi can get the international community to act. How about some Russian and Chinese enforcers, for a change?

25 posted on 02/21/2006 6:21:10 AM PST by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TheForceOfOne

If Iran wants a nuke bomb so bad, let's give them one... or two... maybe three!

Air delivery no extra charge!


26 posted on 02/21/2006 6:30:02 AM PST by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

Heard anything from Kofi Annan about kicking them out of the U.N.?


*crickets*


27 posted on 02/21/2006 6:32:27 AM PST by nuconvert ([there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TheForceOfOne

You are right - we all need to realize that we (most of the western world) and moslems/arabs/ may as well be on separate planets.

The only thing they will respect is force - no amount of negotiation is going to make any difference.

AND algore is an idiot.


28 posted on 02/21/2006 6:37:48 AM PST by SusaninOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SusaninOhio
Everything we and the rest of the world do from this point forward short of taking down this dangerous regime is wasting time. The clock is ticking.

We will face oil shortages and other problems in order to deal with this situation but that cannot be avoided. We will survive whatever happens.

Nobody wants war, losing our loved ones, the pain, etc. but the world is a very dangerous place for Americans these days and it isn't going to get better wishing it away.

The guy is practically begging us for a fight because he thinks we are weak. Even after the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan the image of America as a paper tiger still lingers. It makes me wonder what damage the Democrats are doing against our tomorrow with the insane "Get Bush at any cost" today.
29 posted on 02/21/2006 6:54:38 AM PST by TheForceOfOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
"I'm thinking that about 500,000 heavily armed assassins could get the job done."

- I understand that ex President Carter has been floating a solution involving a surprise strike consisting of marines and helicopters under cover of a sand storm.
30 posted on 02/21/2006 7:03:08 AM PST by finnigan2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TheForceOfOne

I don't care that the dems are skizo..I just wish they would get on their meds.


31 posted on 02/21/2006 7:09:11 AM PST by Earthdweller ("West to Islam" Cake. Butter your liberals, slowly cook France, stir in Europe then watch it rise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scott7278
This Black ninja? Image hosting by Photobucket
32 posted on 02/21/2006 7:10:47 AM PST by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: scott7278

Ninijas, sure- but never overlook the Very Special Forces:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/29257


33 posted on 02/21/2006 10:00:10 AM PST by Gefreiter ("Are you drinking 1% because you think you're fat?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
"Ahmadinejad mocks the major powers for their "obsession with passing resolutions."

"They just don't get it," he told an audience in Bushehr earlier this month. "They think that because they pass a resolution everyone is obliged to obey them. Our message is simple: Pass resolutions until you are blue in the face! We are guided by what the Hidden Imam tells us, not what you dictate in your resolutions."

That seems straighforward enough. Wonder if anyone will take him at his word?

No way! There must be some place for diplomacy in this matter, regardless of what he says! Thanks, Kofi. Now sit down and shut up.

34 posted on 02/21/2006 11:25:43 AM PST by siunevada (If we learn nothing from history, what's the point of having one? - Peggy Hill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: scott7278
"It would scare the (expletive) out of al Qaeda if suddenly a bunch of black ninjas rappelled out of helicopters in to the middle of their camp. It would get us an enormous deterrence and show those guys we're not afraid."

He was real big on movies, wasn't he?

Ooo, General! What about these guys?


35 posted on 02/21/2006 11:30:53 AM PST by siunevada (If we learn nothing from history, what's the point of having one? - Peggy Hill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt

Russia and china are part of the problem. Particularly china. They'll be no help.


36 posted on 02/21/2006 11:31:01 AM PST by monkeywrench (Deut. 27:17 Cursed be he that removeth his neighbor's landmark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TheForceOfOne

My opinion as an arm-chair warrior:

1) Ground attack on Tehran
2) Air attack on key military installations
3) Much propoganda dropped to the Iranian people letting them know we do not want to harm them, simply overthrow the Iranian leadership.


37 posted on 02/21/2006 12:19:43 PM PST by quant5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheForceOfOne

"He isn't afraid of us, he wants a showdown, and he'll get it."

How right you are.


38 posted on 02/21/2006 12:21:12 PM PST by quant5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: monkeywrench

Then lets kick them off of the Security Council. They have just been warming a seat for 50 years, anyway.


39 posted on 02/21/2006 12:32:31 PM PST by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: quant5
Hello quant5 :)

I thought about this Iran problem and I have come to a conclusion. We rolled into Iraq twice using conventional warfare. There was a minimal loss of life on our side during each battle.

We have lost most of our troops to IED's or gorilla warfare. If and when we had the forces to attack Iran in a conventional manner we wouldn't need to stay longer than it would take to destroy all nuclear operations from the ground not the air. An air attack cannot guarantee complete removal of the nuclear program.

We kill or capture their leaders and tell the Iranian youth the country is yours now and bug out. No big democracy plan or trying to hold elections, we are out of there period.
40 posted on 02/21/2006 12:33:05 PM PST by TheForceOfOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-45 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson