"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

As a Nation Mourns the World still Turns

Not to be crass or imply that I have no heart and do not care; but as the 24/7 news cycle has turned its attention from Anna Nicolle, Don Imus and the rest; Iran has not gone away, nor North Korea but that is for a later post. We do need to take time to mourn and/or say prayers for those affected by this senseless slaughter. The media turns to wall to wall coverage of the tragic event; while those who would do us harm likely see this coverage as just another example of the Western lack of a stomach to address its own existence.

While the world turns, Russian non-assistance is illustrated by Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the Russian State Duma International Affairs Committee:

"The only scenario that should be completely ruled out is the military one, the use of force against Iran."

President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, your friend and mine Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeated the oft recited refrain yesterday:

"The Iranian people will continue to defend its legitimate demands and rights [in the nuclear sphere], and will not yield an inch."

He this time however, did not say anything along the lines of, ‘but Iran is ready to negotiate.’ Regarding global efforts to stop the “peaceful nuclear” development, the president had this to add:

"these policies will not only fail to bring positive results, but will harm those who conduct them instead."

In solidarity with everything extremist, Britain's National Union of Journalists denounced Israel on Friday for its "military adventures" in Gaza and Lebanon, called on the government to impose sanctions and urged a boycott of Israeli goods; at its annual delegate meeting.

Other condemnations on the agenda are the US Detention center at Gitmo and in support of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. Look for further unbiased reporting from U.K. tabloids; a trusted source.

A source of good news, but only if the E.U. decides to get off the pot is the fact that if it were to respond appropriately to the Iranian threat it would cut off economic ties with the Tehrrorists in Tehran.

As written by Matthias Küntzel at Réalité EU:

“If any power is still able to get the regime in Tehran to back off without the use of military force, then that power is the European Union. The USA can’t do it because it has no trade with Iran. China, Japan and Russia can’t do it either, because Iran can get along without them. But Iran needs Europe. Iran gets 40% of its imports from the EU, which in turn takes in 25% of Iranian exports.”

Back in 2003 when the Tehrrorists had to admit to their secret nuclear program; technology exports from key EU nations, actually increased by 29%. This is the epitome of “business as usual,” with economic/business interests holding more importance than the threat of an unhinged leadership running wild with nuclear options.

Küntzel ponders if:

If Iran were to develop nuclear weapons, the whole of the Middle East would go nuclear too – whether because the Iranian regime would fulfil its promise to pass the technology on to its friends or because the Arab regimes would seek their own nuclear capability in Iran’s wake.”

Which need not be pondered as yesterday’s news reported that other Middle Eastern nations, such as Turkey, Egypt and roughly a dozen nations have looked to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna for assistance in starting their own programs. As witnessed of Saudi Arabia:

“they are scrambling to hire atomic contractors, buy nuclear hardware and build support for a regional system of reactors.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently said, “We must take the Iranian President’s rhetoric seriously;” to which I would add the historical warning that the U.S. chose to take Saddam Hussein’s rhetoric seriously and has now been blamed for the security issues in Iraq revealing the inherent problems with proactive actions versus reactive.

Rhetoric from Ahmadinejad, whether in writing to President Bush or to the Iranian people in general:

“Those with insights can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems”, He sees himself and his country as being in the midst of a “historical war that has been underway for hundreds of years” and drums into the heads of his followers that "we must make ourselves aware of the baseness of our enemy, such that our holy hatred will spread ever further like a wave." In order to win this war, the Shahab 5 medium-range missile, which can carry nuclear warheads and strike almost any target in Europe, is being built. In order to win this war, thousands of suicide bombers have been recruited and Hezbollah cells established throughout Europe – cells whose members are under the direct command of the Iranian secret services.”

Merkel’s statements on Iran, like “Iran has blatantly crossed the red line. I say it as a German chancellor. A president who questions Israel’s right to exist, a president who denies the Holocaust cannot expect to receive any tolerance from Germany;” are themselves rhetoric until some type of action is taken. Action, that unfortunately was not forthcoming from the EU during the recent “15 victims of a misunderstanding,” crisis and is still yet to be seen.

Are Iran’s intents benign in general? Is it all just talk? Can we actually allow the Tehran Tehrrorist leadership to develop nuclear energy that may be used for purposes more malignant? One can say, the mullahs may one day replaced or with confident assurances that Ahmadinejad will not be in power forever. But what can one say of the younger generation of Iranians; the school children who according to Geoffrey van Orden at Réalité EU are being taught from propagandistic materials:

“The Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace (CMIP), an organisation whose purpose is to monitor textbooks throughout the Middle East, finds that Iranian textbooks are preparing its younger generation for participation and self-sacrifice in a global war against the West. CMIP's careful in-depth analysis of 155 Iranian textbooks and teachers' guides currently in use clearly and unequivocally observes that the very system that is responsible for instilling the values that will guide its society for generations to come is promoting the obligation of fighting the West worldwide.”

Recently “The Middle East Interest,” posted that “If Washington is serious about winning the war against the terrorism and promoting democracy and reform in the Middle East, it should embrace a policy of regime change in Iran.” In as much as Washington needs to be serious, the economic factors as contributed to by “business as usual” attitudes in the EU must also be addressed and right now!

  • DeMediacratic Nation Blogrolls

    Please give this Post/Blog a Vote - Top Blogs

    © blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks