Politics: June 2006 Archives

Iran has spurned direct talks with the US, but they say it's because of the condition that they must first stop enriching uranium. Looking at it from a context neutral standpoint, I have to agree with that point of view in that it does seem they would be conceding the point at issue even before talks are begun.



On the other hand, we're not talking context neutral. We're talking crazy mullahs play with nukes here. When the cops are talking someone down in a hostage situation, they don't give the bad guy what he wants, or concede that they will. Matter of fact, that's purely an appeaser's tactic. Give the enemy what they want, and maybe they'll conquer you last. Given the context, leaders employing a strategy of appeasement should be impeached.



Associated Press has a few more details.



Austin Bay thinks the american offer put the emphasis back where it belongs, on Iranian nuclear weapons.



Dr. Sanity speculates on Iran's next move, and she doesn't think it'll be anything "nice, like donating to the Indonesian relief effort". She think's he needs to do something to save face.



Atlas Shrugged has more, including a video of an interview with John Bolton.



"no options are off the table."



One thing that very pointedly occurred to me while watching the Bolton video is that the United States could handle Iran very easily, by being exactly the same sort of country that the "no blood for oil" crowd would have us believe we are: By destroying the regime and leaving. Hit them, hit them hard, decapitate the monster, and let someone else worry about picking up the pieces. No "Amercian occupation" to rail against, because there is none. No ongoing bleeding of the american servicefolk. Just remove the regime, and say we're done. If the Iranians can pick up the pieces from there, great. If americans as individuals want to donate or go help pick up pieces, better. But no target for an ongoing insurgency, and if they end up so bollixed up that they invite us back in to help them reassemble the country, that removes any wind from the sails of "resistance." Mind you, there'd be a hellish lot of human misery there until the pieces got picked up, but hey, no american soldiers would be dying.



I also think it quite likely that Iran could fragment in such an eventuality into three or more smaller countries, smaller countries that have fewer resources to act as fuel for global problems, not to mention the fact that the main goal of the power structure in the splinter states would be to avoid reabsorption by whatever rump state ends up with the biggest portion of the pie, while a lot of the resources of said rump state would be expended in attempting to reabsorb the splinters. Win-win-win, except for the poor folks who are unfortunate enough to have to live through it. I don't like it, but that doesn't stop me from appreciating the intellectual beauty and simplicity of it.



Now, pardon me while I go exorcise the ghosts of Nicolo Macchiavelli and Otto Von Bismarck.