[Changleen]

Will George Bush go after Iran next or will his previous mis-adventures stay his hand? Or is there a third way?

Iran: The Case for Containment

by Pat Buchanan

With the 150,000 U.S. troops in Iraq now the daily target of guerrilla attack—and no exit strategy in sight—the War Party has begun to caw for a policy of “regime change” in Tehran.

But the president has seemed hesitant and understandably so. For clearly the Pentagon did not prepare him for the criminality, chaos, and resistance we would encounter after the fall of Baghdad or for the possibility that Saddam’s weapons might not be found.

Bush’s problem, however, is there is hard evidence Tehran is conducting a crash program to build nuclear weapons. While U.S. eyes had previously been focused on the Russian-built nuclear plant at Bushehr, a second plant has been discovered. Now, a third has been placed off limits by Tehran to international inspectors.

As Iran is awash in oil, what purpose are they for? If it is to produce electric power, why have the mullahs been so secretive about them? Why have they not invited in UN inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to demonstrate their benign character? The answer suggests itself.

Bush has now declared that the world “cannot tolerate” atomic weapons in Iran. But only America has the power and will to enforce such a policy if Iran is determined to possess such weapons. And what are our options?

The war option—invasion and disarmament of Iran—appears off the table. We do not have the ground forces. The UN Security Council has passed no resolution directing Iran to open up its nuclear sites for inspection. The president does not have the authority from Congress to wage war on Iran. And the American people are unprepared for a third war in three years.

As for a pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, that would be seen by Iranians as an act of criminal aggression against their country. It would very likely unite the people and regime in furious resolve to pay America back with acts of terror and with aid to the Iraqi intifada, the Afghan resistance, and al-Qaeda. This could lead to all-out war, a war in which America would have no allies.

As for the president’s support for the Iranian students who have been marching against the regime, that seems only to have left those students exposed to the charge of being American dupes.

Another option is to continue working with the Europeans and the Security Council to pressure Iran to open up to IAEA inspection. Eventually, through a threat of economic sanctions, we might force Tehran to put its nuclear facilities under international watch. But if the ayatollahs have made a decision to acquire the same weapons Pakistan and Israel have, then even sanctions may not work. And if Iran presses on with its nuclear program, which may be only two or three years from completion, what do we do?

Bush could face the situation Truman faced when he learned that Stalin, thanks to U.S. traitors and spies, had exploded an atomic bomb four years before we estimated he could build one. It is the situation Lyndon Johnson faced when Mao’s China exploded its first atomic bomb in 1964.

In both crises, America adopted a policy of containing Stalin and Mao with air, land, and sea power and of deterring them from threatening us with nuclear weapons by building a mighty missile and bomber force of our own.

Containment and deterrence. The policy derided by President Bush as inadequate for an age of rogue states and nuclear weapons remains America’s reliable fallback position in dealing with Iran.

Nor is it a policy to be disrespected. Since the fall of the Shah in 1979, America has been isolated from Iran. Result: a generation has grown up that knows nothing of the Shah and sees as its enemy not faraway America, but the mullahs at home who have misruled and repressed them all their lives. Twice, Iranians have voted by 70 percent to throw the mullahs out. Twice, they have been disillusioned by the weakling reformers they have elected.

But, lately, anti-government demonstrators have been back in the streets. The mullahs are steadily losing favor, as a prelude to losing power. Thus, before President Bush heeds the counsel of a War Party that has us bogged down in Iraq, he should reconsider the merits of the policy that won the Cold War: deterrence and containment.

For in power, Islamic fundamentalism has proven itself as great a failure as Bolshevism and Maoism. Time is on our side.

What America needs in its clash with rogue regimes like North Korea and Iran is not pre-emptive wars, but what Mark Twain called the “calm confidence of a Christian with four aces.”

Pretty clever guy for a conservative. If only other people had the same ability to resist blindly following the policies of their corrupt idiot-in-chief.

 

[chicodude]

that guy is a god damn **** ****** ****** **** that ******* his mom ***** in the ***** ****


why do people still support him? he has the I.Q. of my ass

 

[Toshi]

chicodude01, why do you say that? and who is your comment directed to, bush or buchanan (the author)?

 

[Silver]

Wow, who would have ever thought that Pat Buchanan would be a voice of reason and moderation in the Republican party?

 

[Tashi]

Well, he may be critical, but I'm not so sure that advocating a return to Cold-War stuly deterrance and containment is really a reasonable thing to do. Notice all of the contries with nukes and all of the uncontained nukes in the former USSR. Proliferation is scary.

 

[Slugman]

And who does he think will do the fighting? We've already stretched our full time and reserve soldiers incredibly thin with our current crusade.

Who do we have left... the boy scouts?

 

[dante]

Wow, who would have ever thought that Pat Buchanan would be a voice of reason and moderation in the Republican party?

hey, I was a republican back when they were advocating smaller governments, a balanced budget and to stay out of foreign affairs (remember the outcry when clinton intervened in Somalia, Bosnia and sent missiles into sudan and afghanistan?)... now they're the party of bigger government, higher deficits, and world "improvement." So changed my registration, and am voting for kerry. If the dems sweep into power, get power-hungry and try to shove extreme liberalism down our throats, I'll switch back.

 

[biggins]

i wanna see the rich kids of these rich assholes go to war for this dumb trigger happy texas redneck dictator fascist peice of shlt. i hate george bush with a passion. who ever said that nobody but the us can have some friggin "nucular"weapons anyway. he's just i dumb racist redneck that has enough moneyto buy himself into or out of anything he wants to
:mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble: :mumble:

 

[Tenchiro]

Careful yo, if he gets re-elected you might end up a a "Patriotism Re-Education Program"...


I for one love Dubya, he's one crazy patriotic sh*tkicking Texan.

 

[Tashi]

Yeah, it's just too bad he's president at the same time.

 

[chicodude]

chicodude01, why do you say that? and who is your comment directed to, bush or buchanan (the author)?

bush, because hes a moron. he is trigger happy and he wants to bring back the draft

 

[Toshi]

bush, because hes a moron. he is trigger happy and he wants to bring back the draft

ok. i thought you didn't like the article/buchanan, and was ready to question that

 

[N8 v2.0]

I notice that Kerry is attempting to downplay anti-war protests during the DimConvention this week... seems Kerry plans on leaving the troops in Iraq too.

Remember he voted to Authorize Unilateral Action In Iraq...

Remember he said, " I Actually Voted for the $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It."

By the way, if Dim's think the threat of terrorism is a fabrication of G.W. Bush then why all the complex security surrounding their convention?

 

[Toshi]

I notice that Kerry is attempting to downplay anti-war protests during the DimConvention this week... seems Kerry plans on leaving the troops in Iraq too.

Remember he voted to Authorize Unilateral Action In Iraq...

Remember he said, " I Actually Voted for the $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It."

By the way, if Dim's think the threat of terrorism is a fabrication of G.W. Bush then why all the complex security surrounding their convention?

a) kerry is not anti-war. this is known. many anti-war people thus dislike him, but less than they dislike bush, who is an outright war hawk.

b) terrorism is not a fabrication. the point of those who object to bush's policy is that america's stance has worsened the terrorist threat, not lessened it.

 

[LordOpie]

Remember he said, " I Actually Voted for the $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It."

Are you ignorant of that situation or are you simply pushing the repub agenda/propaganda?

 

[Tashi]

Are you ignorant of that situation or are you simply pushing the repub agenda/propaganda?

What situation is that?

 

[bushwacker]

What situation is that?

20/20 hindsight

 

[LordOpie]

What situation is that?

uhh, the one I quoted regarding the quote.

That quote is misleading. He didn't vote against arming and protecting the troops, he voted against how to pay for it. Bush is extremely fiscally irresponsible.

 

[golgiaparatus]

bush, because hes a moron. he is trigger happy and he wants to bring back the draft

Bush's problem is that he's paranoid of WMD's because of 9/11. I'd be okay with him if he could think of a solution that didnt (1) cause a war and (2) use up all of america's money.

Its all good, I'll be the hell out of this country before the $hit hits the fan thumbung my nose at all the idiot republican jackoffs that think bush is the man.

Maybe I'll go visit my friends in NZ... they seem to have their chit together.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Sig="The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?"

LMAO!

 

[Tashi]

Yeah I was thinking it was one of those type of misrepresentions. One of the best types of mis-representation was a Rebublican attack ad that led youto believe that Kerry voted four times to deny the troops equipment, pay and the like when it was really only one bill, and one that had some other serious issues not atached to the war. What was the $87 billion for, continued occupation? Do you know why he voted for than against it? Was there a sketchy rider attached to to or something? Supposedly Kerry volted against the Homeland Security bill, but that was die to the fact that those employees wouldn't have certian rights that other federal employees did. Got branded unpatriontic for that one, 'cause it sure is unpatriotic to protect American workers rights. Freakin' mis-information.

 

[fluff]

uhh, the one I quoted regarding the quote.

That quote is misleading. He didn't vote against arming and protecting the troops, he voted against how to pay for it. Bush is extremely fiscally irresponsible.

Yo Loops, what's that wesbite that de-spins the campaign propaganda? I had subscribed for e-mail update but I changed jobs and can't remember the URL.

 

[LordOpie]

Yeah I was thinking it was one of those type of misrepresentions. One of the best types of mis-representation was a Rebublican attack ad that led youto believe that Kerry voted four times to deny the troops equipment, pay and the like when it was really only one bill, and one that had some other serious issues not atached to the war. What was the $87 billion for, continued occupation? Do you know why he voted for than against it? Was there a sketchy rider attached to to or something? Supposedly Kerry volted against the Homeland Security bill, but that was die to the fact that those employees wouldn't have certian rights that other federal employees did. Got branded unpatriontic for that one, 'cause it sure is unpatriotic to protect American workers rights. Freakin' mis-information.

That (in)famous quote is totally screwy.

google : " I Actually Voted for the $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It." -- it'll pull up some decent info.

Yo Loops, what's that wesbite that de-spins the campaign propaganda? I had subscribed for e-mail update but I changed jobs and can't remember the URL.

http://www.factcheck.org/



You got a new gig? Like it?


I still want N8's response... "ignorance or propoganda?"

 

[fluff]

http://www.factcheck.org/

You got a new gig? Like it?

Cheers for the URL.

Yeah, gotta new job, working for the RNLI - Royal National Lifeboat Association. Finally a job I find ethically satisfying, helping to save lives rather than simply generate profit. Plus which I can cycle to work (hence singlespeed doo-dah). It's all good.

 

[Changleen]

I notice that Kerry is attempting to downplay anti-war protests during the DimConvention this week... seems Kerry plans on leaving the troops in Iraq too.

I think that pulling out now would be a little irresponsible, don't you think? GW got America into this mess, whoever gets in has a duty to stay the course, rebuild what they destroyed and basically leave the country in a better state than they found it, which was the reason given for the war after WMD and immediate threat fell apart. I think there's quite a way to go with that project still...

So, the future as I see it:

Under GW in term 2: Develop case against Iran (despite selling Nuclear reactor to Iran in 70's), make US public forget about Iraq (Fox is already not showing most of the insurgent activity anymore - old news apparantly), continue to activly support Jewish terrorism, pull troops out of Iraq, Invade Iran, piss off the 5 remaining people in the rest of the world who are not currently pissed off with you, maybe start a nuclear exchange in the middle east, and finally ensure that you, your kids and your grandkids have to endure the highest taxes ever, no hope of a state pension or healthcare whatsoever due to the frankly criminal defecit. Oh and continue to fvck the environment in the arse, turn the US into a dictatorship and cut funding for everything else. (where does all the money go?)

Under Kerry: By virtue of not being Bush, calm down the world a fair bit, give the US a fresh chance at world relationships, stay in Iraq an hopefully actually finish the job, not invade Iran, try to get a handle on your ridiculous defecit, tax people who can afford it, reverse Bush's funding cuts in just about everything, not be a facist right wing christian fundamentalist and generally return America to 'normal'.

Is there a choice?

 

[Changleen]

Yeah, gotta new job, working for the RNLI - Royal National Lifeboat Association. Finally a job I find ethically satisfying, helping to save lives rather than simply generate profit. Plus which I can cycle to work (hence singlespeed doo-dah). It's all good.

Cool, RNLI saved my Dad's life a while back! Do they do the two flares thing where you are or do you get a pager?