Obama Administration Struggles With Language.
The long argument against the Tehran regime will have successes. Not now. M. Ahmadinejad's provocative visit last week to the Isfahan nuclear energy facility was not a good day for the United States. The Tehran boast that it has up to seven thousand centrifuges in operation is well past any redline identified over the years by the UN watchdog the IAEA. The day of reckoning was last week. In a surprising response from Washington, there is a fresh gossipy policy report in the NYT that the Obama team is "brainstorming" new diplomatic words and definitions in order to find a way not to confront Tehran over its nuke weapons programs. The word "appeasement" is unattractive. More useful is the word "accommodation."
A review of Iran policy that Mr. Obama ordered after taking office is still under way, and aides say it is not clear how long he would be willing to allow Iran to continue its fuel production, and at what pace. But European officials said that in talks with Mr. Obama and his aides during his trip to Europe, there was agreement that Iran would not accept the kind of immediate shutdown of its facilities that the Bush administration had demanded....
"Our goal remains exactly what it has been in the U.N. resolutions: suspension," one senior administration official said. Another official cautioned that "we are still at the brainstorming level" and said the terms of an opening proposal to Iran were still being debated.
What Happens Next.
Tehran is a predator and a sneak. When the Americans advance, Tehran plays victim. When the Americans retreat, Tehran boasts and provokes. What will follow from the Obama team opening with concessions is that Tehran will grow aggressive and cocky. We have seen this before. The Devils in November, 1934 were craven and cock-sure. Chancellor Adolf Hitler celebrated his 1923 so-called Beer Hall Putsch with much vain publicity in the foreign newspapers. Hitler spoke on the same spot where he had called for a new Reich eleven years before, and he boasted to the reporters that it was not true that he had ducked for cover under the gunfire of the police, rather he had fallen while trying to help an invalid nearby. Hitler also announced the distribution of half a million Reichmarks to the widows and children of deceased Nazi party fellows. Applause. On the same page, there was a preliminary announcement of an alliance between Hitler's Nazi dominated government in Germany and Mussolini's Fascist dominated government in Italy. Few were fooled other than the appeasers in the Stanley Baldwin government at London and the FDR government in Washington. The NYT of 1934 was hesitant. Side by side with Hitler's self-promotion and hints of the Mussolini cunning was a lengthy piece about the "Non-Sectarian Anti-Nazi League." The League believed it was necessary to emphasize that it was not only made up of Jews. Everyone knew the threat, the League announced. Everyone understood that Hitler was not going to behave. The League called for boycotts of and sanctions on Germany. The League pleaded for the democracies to confront Hitler's villainy. The Nazi abuse against the Jews and invalids and gypsies and communists and dissenters in Germany was constant and merciless. The threats and plots against Germany's neighbors were obvious, most especially Austria, Czechoslovakia, France. Hitler claimed that he was righting the wrongs of the Versailles Treaty. London, Paris and Washington maintained that if they could satisfy Hitler's demands, then the peace would hold. No one had stomach for war. The public would not permit belligerent words in the parliaments. The horror of the First War was still fresh. London, Paris and Washington had to find a peaceful way. The worldwide economy was in collapse. There had to be a reasonable settlement. London, Paris and Washington were still brainstorming. The word "appeasement" was unattractive. More useful was the word "accommodation." It was 1934. Diplomacy bought two more years.
Ahmadinejad has publicly stated in Qom and elsewhere that he is on Earth to usher in the Mahdi.
Hitler believed he was anointed, ordained, and protected by God to design Man's presence on Earth.. Ahmadinejad believes that God relies on him to fulfill the Will of God and His Promise of Abiding on Earth in the furtherance of His Will.
Protectorate vs Prophetic Fulfillment. Can Man Make Manifest God's Will?
Ahmad in Africa was denied. Others in all religions have tried. We may not be at war with Islam right now... but, Islam at war with Itself may require that we come to be at war with them.
Does Man try and make prophecy come true? Absolutely.
Can Man Make Prophecy Come True? Not Likely.
If we can be reasonably certain of anything about Obama, it's that he's not overly scrupulous about matching his deeds to his words. For that, so far, I have been thankful, at least as far as national security is concerned. I was deeply pessimistic about what he would do when he held the reins, only to discover that it wasn't very different from what Bush did, no matter what he said during the campaign. The left is going nuts over his continuation of the surveillance policy and his transfer of Gitmo to Bagram. I find that very comforting and encouraging for the future policies vis Iran and North Korea and Syria.
Two years might be a bit too generous considering how fast things move these days. Perhaps the war’s already started. Wasn’t it someone on these very cyber pages not too long ago who suggested that this is how we fight wars in the 21st Century? I think the discussion was about the economic collapse of the West.
As has been mentioned before, Iran's petroleum exports are declining at a rate of ten per cent per year. By the middle of the next decade that hapless country will be a net importer of oil, which means the end of its power. All we have to do to contain Iran is maintain watchful vigilance, nothing more.
Those who portray Iran as some sort of long-range geostrategic threat to America and the West have not made a coherent case for military action. In fact, they haven't even begun.
The ones who are in the most immediate danger do lie in the West... and they have no forces standing that could repel an Iranian movement against them.
The US presence will be as Mr McCain indicated it will be... for the foreseeable future. The restive nature of the area provides the justification for such. If this is not coherent military planning and action coupled with a containment policy of due diligence then I'm not sure what else qualifies except for an outright offensive against the regime.
Like Wallace (oh no not another Academy Awards winning movie!) in Braveheart before the battle at Stirling, I wish someone would "go and pick a fight" and get it all started... so we can put an end to it in short fashion!
Hmm... where would Wallace be? Watching?
The ones who are in the most immediate danger do lie in the West... and they have no forces standing that could repel an Iranian movement against them.
The US presence will be as Mr McCain indicated it will be... for the foreseeable future. The restive nature of the area provides the justification for such. If this is not coherent military planning and action coupled with a containment policy of due diligence then I'm not sure what else qualifies except for an outright offensive against the regime.
Like Wallace (oh no not another Academy Awards winning movie!) in Braveheart before the battle at Stirling, I wish someone would "go and pick a fight" and get it all started... so we can put an end to it in short fashion!
Hmm... where would Wallace be? Watching?
Avast ye scurvy dogs! The pirates are at it again! Arrrrrrrrr .. shiver me timbers!!
Ahmadinejad, Hitler and others believe(d) it is destiny that brought them to power.
(Obama may share the feeling?)
The Israelis now have to choose whether to fight these guys now or wait until they have a nuclear weapon and a method of delivering it? Provoking a fight now may save millions of lives later on.
Obama relies on his rhetorical skills to make despots stay inside their borders. Despots rely on Obama to keep using his rhetorical skills so they may complete weapons development.
I think the Israelis are wise to the "good cop/bad cop" routine Obama and Ahmedinajad are playing. They know they must act to save themselves. What's significant in this is that Bibi knows it. If he has the b***s to pull the trigger is anybody's guess. I suspect he's weighing 'instant wipe-out' against a slow motion press lynching - wondering if it's worth hanging out in the sun and watching your skin slowly pucker and peel off.
We could have stopped Hitler in 1934, it would have involved assassination of a national leader.
No other German leader had the ferocity to do what Mr. Hitler did in the later years, most would have been happy as Chancellor, Mr. Hitler was full of a deep rooted hatred that could not be quenched.
Mr. Kim looks weak, with his body burdened by strokes, Mr. Ahmadinejad is youthful and full of visions of a Persian-Muslim restoration. He is truly a very dangerous man.
The "peace" crowd is delusional, Reagan the great, Sir Winston knew this, FDR did not. Speaking "truth to power" to those who support or ignore the Evil despots is a strategy we are not using currently.
How do you politely get colleagues to defend Kim and Ahmadinejad? They would rather change the subject, but this is the core issue.