If Iran disappeared, would anyone really care?

[StrykerFSU]

I don't think anyone has made the statement that Arabs are crazy or bad. What has been said is that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization...bad. Hamas and PLO are terrorist organizations...bad. I also don't think that anyone has said that everything Israel has done has been good. To revert to a cliche, war is hell. Bad decisions are made but the fact remains that they are our allies and we have mutual interests. The histroy of Israel and its Arab neighbors is very interesting and is far more complicated than "Israel stole Arab land so Arabs mad", though if you only read Edward Said you may think it's that simple but that's another argument.

[StrykerFSU]

Here is the opinion of arguably the weakest President in the history our country on Israel's actions.

http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,431793,00.html

[Adam Gamradt]

Stryker,

I agree, what did that whimp Carter ever do?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_Accords

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SALT_II

I'm sure most people who go to the US Naval Academy are probably whimps too.

Oh yea, he was also way off base on this whole mythical "engergy crisis"

Habitat for Humanity? What a waste of time and effort that is!

Nobel Peace Prize? Bah. I'm not impressed, it's not nearly as glamorous as a movie star.

Standing up for civil rights? Meh.

Give me a break man.

I'd take the arguable weakness of Carter over today's unquestioned devotion to the appearance of strength, no matter the cost, no matter how antagonistic.

[FLAK]

Nobel Peace Prize? Bah. I'm not impressed, it's not nearly as glamorous as a movie star.

Didnt Yasser Arafat also win the Nobel peace prize, even though he was the leader of the PLO when they allegedly bombed (or took part in the bombing of) the U.S. embassy in Beiruit?

[sohotrightnow]

Yeah, there have been some odd choices for the Nobel Peace Prize to say the least. Arafat shared the prize with Rabin and Peres.

[StrykerFSU]

I was just saying that you COULD argue he was one of our weakest Presidents. To address one of your statements, the folks in Annapolis are absolutely not wimps and I don't think that Carter is a wimp. I do think he had a weak presidency highlighted by the taking of our embassy in Tehran and that now he likes to sit on the sidelines and tell everyone what he thinks they should do even though he was wildly ineffectual when his opinion actually mattered.

Back on topic, what should be our course of action now that Iran has again stated their commitment to nuclear armament in spite of the UN resolution?

[Zeuslax]

Back on topic, what should be our course of action now that Iran has again stated their commitment to nuclear armament in spite of the UN resolution?

In addition, they rejected international inspectors to their underground facility!

[sohotrightnow]

Bomb them!

[Adam Gamradt]

Ask them nicely?

I'm kidding of course.

Clearly, things are out of hand.

Perhaps I'm guilty of hindsight here, but I bet we'd be better off if we'd kept our eye on the ball. Of course, this point is now moot.

Iran is part of the bigger picture in the Middle East. The Middle East is now a tinder box, one mistake or accident, and we're in the middle of the next world war.

I believe Iran's citizens are the key. My hope is that the young will become even more frustrated than they already are, and will reign in the clerics, in turn, tempering the rhetoric coming out of that country.

I believe America must lead by example. We must learn from the past, and accept accountability for our role in creating the tinder box that is the Middle East.

Stryker, would you agree that if we had not propped up the Shah in the late 60's and early 70's, President Carter may have had a better run?

The enemy of my enemy, is not necessarily my friend. This type of thinking has compounded a lot of problems for us, and the world. Iran, Iraq, Afganistan, Israel, the list goes on and on.

I guess I'm hoping that my Persian friends are representative of the culture in that part of the world, more so than their radical leader.

[Zeuslax]

Stryker, would you agree that if we had not propped up the Shah in the late 60's and early 70's, President Carter may have had a better run?

I'm not stryker, but I would have to agree with this. I also wouldn't characterize Carter as weak. He was president at a tumultuous time, had terrible advice, and was very naive for sure. (Sound familiar) His foreign policy tactics are very debatable, but I think hold lots of merit. He dealt with countries by how they handled human rights. Typically, if you're doing the human rights thing well you're taking care of business in all aspects.

[peterwho]

I believe Iran's citizens are the key. My hope is that the young will become even more frustrated than they already are, and will reign in the clerics, in turn, tempering the rhetoric coming out of that country.

While that's a nice thought, the reality of the Iran Hostage Crisis was that it was a mob of Iranian students, under the direction of the Ayatollah Khomeini, who seized the embassy and held the Americans hostage (it has been widely rumored that the new prime minister was one of the leaders).

[Sonny]

Bomb them!

We have nothing to worry about with regard to Iran. Didn't CBS's Mike Wallace just assure us that Iranian President is an alright guy?

[Adam Gamradt]

I think you just proved my point. I also think we are on the same page.

The youth movement took over the country once.

This could happen again, but this time, in the direction of greater liberty, and freedom of speech.

I believe the technological progress we're making today will allow for open transfer of knowledge, which in turn will escalate the liberalization of Iran.

Of course, a single event, or a mistake by a world leader could start a world wide conflict, history tells us this is so. With each passing day, I find it difficult to argue that this hasn't happened already.

Take for example, the preemptive expansion of the war on terror in to Iraq, and the ever changing justification for which this expansion was based. Clearly, today the facts indicate that this preemptive expansion was based on erroneous information, and was clearly a strategic error. Follow that mistake up with the egregious lack of planning for the aftermath, and you have what we have today, which is just short of total chaos. Going to war in Iraq without a plan to win the peace was a mistake that has damaged the reputation of our country. This has made the road ahead much more uncertain, and most importantly, has cost tens of thousands of people their lives, many of them, completely innocent. I would guess, that like most Iraqis, and Americans for that matter, the typical Iranian just wants to be left alone, to live in peace.

[Adam Gamradt]

Sonny,

Not sure where you got your information, but he seems to be going at him pretty hard. People called and emailed to complain about Wallace being too confrontational.

Here's the link to the interview.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/ ... shtml#Post

Of course, being a good Fox News Passive Listener (TM), I'm guessing your just passing along some pseudo-information from the Drudge Report?

[Danny Hogan]

Perhaps I'm guilty of hindsight here, but I bet we'd be better off if we'd kept our eye on the ball. Of course, this point is now moot.

what/who was the ball?