Iran’s major missile exercise in November, during an earlier saber rattling
episode, from Iranian state television.
** GIULIANI SOUNDS LIKE CANDIDATE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, WITH CAVEATS. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani ventured to New Hampshire today and addressed a state Republican conference in Manchester, where he was well, though hardly ecstatically, received. He sounded more like a candidate, saying America must fight Islamic jihadists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere, touting his record of keeping taxes down in New York. But he set no timetable for a candidacy, saying: “The timetable is when is the right time, when do I have the confidence and the sense of organization.”
Giuliani reminded the crowd of his much-praised role on and after 9/11. “When I say we have to bring peace and security — I saw that happen in New York and I made it happen.” He also cautioned the crowd that the military effort in Iraq — he has endorsed the Bush surge strategy there, but has not championed it — may well fail.
** BLAIR AND MCCAIN UPBEAT ON GREENHOUSE ACTION IN DAVOS. As the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland drew to a close today, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. Senator John McCain were upbeat on the prospects for greater action against global climate change. “I admit it’s very late,” said McCain, a frontrunning Republican presidential candidate. “I think the U.S. Congress will act soon on this issue and I think the administration will also.”
For his part, Blair said he sensed that attitudes in America are in the midst of “a quantum shift,” saying the world seems “on the verge of a breakthrough” on climate change.
Blair praised California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who had been slated to give a major address before his doctor forebade extensive air travel while his leg, injured last month in a skiing mishap, heals. Said Blair: “Many individual American states -notably California, with whose Governor I signed a bilateral agreement on this subject last year – are setting targets for reducing emissions and taking far-reaching action to achieve them. American businesses – including many of their major power companies – have become advocates of a binding cap and trade system.
“The German G8 Presidency gives us an opportunity to agree at least the principles of a new binding international agreement to come into effect when the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012; but one which is more radical than Kyoto and more comprehensive, one which this time, includes all the major countries of the world. It is a prize of tantalising significance and I think it is possible.”
** HILLARY IN IOWA. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, on her first trip to Iowa in three years, drew over 1500 people and 150 media to a town hall meeting in an overflow high school gymnasium in Des Moines. She anticipated a tough campaign in next year’s general election for president. “When you are attacked, you have to deck your opponent,” Clinton said. “I have been through the political wars longer than some of you have been alive. We’ve got to be prepared to hold our ground and fight back.”
Despite criticism from many on the left, Clinton made no apologies for her vote to authorize the Iraq War. “There are no do-overs in life,” she said. She criticized the information offered by the administration of President George W. Bush to justify the invasion.
Speaking of the overall Terror War, which she says Bush is thoroughly botching, Clinton struck a very somber note. “I do think we are engaged in a war against heartless, ruthless enemies,” she said. “If they could come after us again tomorrow they would do so.”
** SABERS RATTLE. While American sabers rattle, with a second aircraft carrier underway to the region and new presidential authority to kill Iranian agents in Iraq, Iranian sabers have continued their rattling, with the second major missile exercise in three months.
Meanwhile, two politicians who may have a fair amount of saber rattling in their futures, Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Rudy Giuliani, venture into somewhat unfamiliar territory.
Senator Clinton will be in Iowa this weekend, for the first time in three years. Although the national Democatic frontrunner, she currently trails John Edwards by a substantial margin in polling for the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, and is also well behind Barack Obama.
Former New York Mayor Giuliani heads to New Hampshire for the second time in three months. He’s running a little behind John McCain there. The trip is important because there are still quite a few people who don’t think he’ll really run, although he has just sold the investment portion of his portfolio of companies. (Another reason he may have sold it is it was reportedly not a big moneymaker.) The Washington insiders’ Hotline rates him only third among Republican contenders, despite the fact that he actually leads in many polls, behind McCain and Mitt Romney. But he has hired some major staff of late, and is coming to California next month to keynote the California Republican Party Convention in Sacramento.
Now back from the moves of leading potential future saber rattlers in the White House to the drama of the moment. With American politics dominated by the crisis in Iraq, and the Middle East in general, attention is beginning to turn to the US face-off with Iran.
Noted military blogger Bill Roggio thinks that the Iranian leadership is feeling the hit from economic, diplomatic, and military moves. Pressure on the Iranian regime, he says, may be paying off, as this report notes.
Meanwhile, Iran is figuring in the dramatic crisis in Lebanon.
In Beirut, where the government of Lebanon is under tremendous pressure from Hezbollah, a co-founder and former leader of Hezbollah said that the organization is now an arm of Iranian intelligence, that its current leader takes direction from Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Khamenei’s goal, in this view, is to “destroy Iraq and Lebanon.”
Read 
| Comments (0) |
Whoa, the rockets red glare. That place is a tinder box waiting to go up.
Hillary hasn;t been to Iowa in 3 years! Sheesh.
Thank you for the link to Roggio. His reporting was unknown to me and I just spent some time at his blog and I am impressed…his links were very helpful, I found the link to the interview with Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Affairs Minister Prince Saud al Faysal (Paris, 24 Jan. French daily “Le Figaro”)especially of interest. I think the Israelis and the Saudis have some common security interest which could possibly lead to a relationship of cooperation that could be helpful stablizing the region…but it appears that could only come about if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be seriously addressed by all involved parties and hopefully come to some closure in this next round of negotiations via the “Quartet” Approach outlined by Condi recently…
Hillary didn’t go to Iowa last year because she was running for re-election in New York and didn’t want to deal with presidential talk.
I don’t know why she hadn’t gone before that. The Clintons have been popular there but have never really done the caucus thing. Bill skipped Iowa in ’92 because homestate Sen. Harkin was running. In ’96 he was already the president and unopposed.
Yeah, he’s good.
>Thank you for the link to Roggio. His reporting was unknown to me and I just spent some time at his blog and I am impressed…his links were very helpful,
Ka-boom!
That is an awful lot of missiles they are firing off there.
The trick in the confrontation with Iran will be pressuring without inciting a conflagration. I am sure I trust Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney to have that deft touch. Or that they want to. They appear far too “faith-based” for my liking.
Hillary Clinton is no softie.
“McCain (in Davos link you provided) is certainly no neo-con! and he is right to say that the US wants to see some reciprocity from the EU!
There is some great stuff coming out from Davos, especially from bloggers! Some “upbeat” stuff was said at a World Economic Forum by Israel and Palestinian leaders too! (See:Below)More importantly, something substantive also came out of DAVOS which will could potentially be a moderating force in the area and will certainly help both Israel and Palestine fight currently high poverty rates: the founder of Davos announced the Israeli-Palestinian business council to stimulate foreign investment!!!
“Following messages of support sent via video by World Economic Forum Young Global Leaders from Jerusalem, Ramallah and Tel Aviv, Israeli and Palestinian leaders in Davos reiterated their commitment to finding a two-state solution and to resuming long-stalled negotiations.
“Leaders here have listened to these young voices,” said Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum. “They have asked you to deliver a new vision with no delay or excuses.”
Responding to the messages for peace, Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, said that the Middle East is in dire need of peace, with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict being one of the most serious that requires a solution.
“What is required now is for us to trace the beginning and the end of this peace process,” he said. “Our hand remains outstretched to start the negotiation process. Fear and despair must be replaced by hope and forgiveness.”
Tzipi Livni, Vice-Prime Minister/ Minister of Foreign Affairs/Israel, said that a Palestinian state is “not an illusion” but something that is achievable.
“There is a Palestinian state at the end of the process…this is a step-by-step process that gives a political horizon,” she said. “We must stick to the vision of two states living side by side, living together in peace.”Livni reaffirmed Israel’s commitment to the Road Map, but said that the current Palestinian government has to fulfil its part of the agreement, including accepting Israel’s right to exist and renouncing terrorism. She added that in order to realize the two-state vision, moderates on both sides need to fight against the extremists who want to destroy it.
Closing the session, Schwab announced “that the Forum is in the advanced stage of creating an Israeli-Palestinian business council to stimulate foreign investment.”
I like what Abbas said about “hope and forgiveness”…
The Iranian missiles are all Russian crap from the late 80′s and early 90′s. They are noted for enormous lack of accuracy and tendency to misfire upon hitting the target. I think Jane’s says that Soviet medium range missiles were a bigger threat than SS-20′s — which are the long range delivery vehicles.
Also, keep in mind, their nuclear technology is heavily Soviet/Russian made — in other words, they are greater threat to the Iranian public (and the region as a whole) than they are to the world at large. I think there is a greater concern about an Iranian nuclear “accident” than these amateurs developing a real nuclear weapon.
Besides, as I have said before, I honestly believe the Iranians are having more internal problems then any of the world knows(save for probably the French whose DGSE intelligence service has the best turn on Iraq). Ahmadinejad is a guy really living on borrowed time politically speaking.
Why? Well I am really happy you asked.
First, the mullahs are very aware that there is a greater likelihood that the U.S./the West will eventually get a larger measure of control with regard to the security situation in the Middle East.
Second, as I have said before, the younger generation (the children of the 1979 Revolution if you will)are demanding a greater say in the affairs of government and the running of the state. Their religious fervor is nowhere near as strong as their parents who overthrew the Shah. Simply put, they just want more. They are beginning to really question why some 70-plus year old imams (many of whom are NOT Iranian-born you should know) are the ones who sit on-high dictating how society should act and leave properly “religious” lives.
Finally, Iran, at all costs, does not want to become a North Korea — isolated from the world community and under constant siege. The imams are well aware of the impact that would have in determining the level of western intervention in destabilizing the country. They have very disgruntled minority populaces in the northern and eastern rural regions of the country who really could give a damn about the mullahs. You don’t want to irritate those tribal leaders either.
Personally, I think all of Ahmadinejad bluster is all for internal consumption. His hold on power is tenuous. He knows one single untoward move would bring the heavy end of the hammer square down on his head. AND, if you remove Iran as a real threat, you would be amazed at how quickly the insurgency in Iraq dries up.
Actually, you are wrong about the Iranian missiles.
They are not “Russian crap” from the ’80s.
They are based on newer missiles developed in North Korea.
Now the Iranians have further upgraded versions of them.
Oh, Russian nuclear technology is crap? Foolish, foolish American. Russia has some of best technology in the world for such matters. Why do you think Bush is pressure Moscow to stop program?
Bill:
I am not wrong and here’s why.
The North Korean missiles are a cheaper copy of a Chinese/Russian design from the late 80′s and early 90′s. That same design has never been improved until recently and the Russians nor the Chinese would ever export the good stuff. Thats a truism dating back to the bad ol’days of the Cold War.
Russian short range missiles (less than 500 miles)were great and their SAM’s were cheap AND accurate. However, Russian medium and long-range missiles, as was discovered after the Cold War ended, had a failure rate hovering around 50%. Their solid fuel components were for crap and were known for frequently exploding during tests. The warheads, while deadly, were decaying because the Russians were simply useless at maintenance.
The Iranians actually had alot of good French missiles (including the anti-ship missiles made famous by the Argentians during the Falklands War) they got during the eighties but used all of them during the Iran-Iraq war. Cash shortages forced the Iranians to go to the Russians, Chinese and North Koreans whose missiles are far less reliable.
The “upgrades” you speak of are also not the latest stuff. Regardless, it still the same crap design and technology. However, even an inaccurate missile could still lay waste to have the Middle East. The Iranians know this.
Jesus, these guys are still struggling to maintain spare parts for their 20 year-old French Mirages and US F-14′s. The Russians, fuly aware of the world’s condemnations, would NEVER sell the Iranians the good stuff.
And yes, Russian nuclear technology is crap. The safety protocols on nearly every Soviet and post-Cold War nuclear site inside Russia are beyond abominable.
Don’t get me wrong, the f(&*()*&ing things could still blow a city to smithereens. But the failure rate of those missiles is still in the 50 percentile range.
I don’t have time on a Saturday afternoon to read your entire post, but you are wrong about the new Iranian missiles.
They are based on relatively new North Korean missiles, which in turn were developed with help from Iran and from China. The new Iranian versions are further upgrades.
It’s always a mistake to be too arrogant about “backward” foreign technology.
Incidentally, let’s not forget that the incompetent Russians have kept the International Space Station from falling into the atmosphere and burning up after the US space shuttle blew up, killing everyone on board.
And China just shot down a satellite in orbit.
CADTS:”(the children of the 1979 Revolution if you will)
There is an opening here to stem the “anti Americanism” with the younger generation, but regime change if comes at all will come slowly …keep in mind that HARDLINERS like Khamenei and the rest of the mullahs still dominate the Iranian military and intelligence services…
CADTS:”AND, if you remove Iran as a real threat, you would be amazed at how quickly the insurgency in Iraq dries up.”
not so sure what you mean by “remove” but in any event I reject you conclusion, i.e.”insurgency in Iraq dries up”…to talk about ANY outcome in the region from any particular action with “certainty” is mistake.
There are many “crosscuts” as Mr. Bradley referenced previously (love that Gary Hart phrase!)
Somehow I missed that.
Somehow I doubt it.
>CADTS:”AND, if you remove Iran as a real threat, you would be amazed at how quickly the insurgency in Iraq dries up.”
I thought the insurgency started after the Iraq army faded into the woodwork instead of get blown up by our tanks and planes.
Essentially correct.
GOSH! Hardball just ended MCed by Andrea Mitchell and all the pundits said Chuck Hagel is running …one called him a “Republican Realist”!!! ..I am so happy!!! …I hope they know what in the hell they are talking about …you never know with these pundits!…Toodles!
Somebody has to stoo Iran.
With all due respect, you are all off the mark.
Its Iranian and Saudi radical $$$ feeding the beast. The “fade into the woodwork” elements of the Iraqi Army running the insurgency is a myth of epic proportions.
Without that money and the tactical leadership of Iranian advisors, the insurgency would have died a long-time ago. Believe me, if the Bushies were smart, they would force the Iranians into a situation where there own political survival becomes a question mark.
The Iraqi insurgency may be based with home-grown talent but it is lead, by and large, by outsiders calling the shots.
And, as with any guerilla operation, money and supply lines are essential. You take out the money suppliers (i.e. a nation state like Iran), you remove the ability of guerilla leaders to conduct operations and, in turn, are further unable to convince the populace your cause is right and good.
Frankly, starting a guerilla operation in Iran would not be such a bad idea…it would put more pressure on Tehran than they can handle. It would, in my opinion, force the Iranians to fight their own “two-front” war — and they can afford it alot less than we can.
Bill…the Russians didn’t keep the International Space Station from falling into the atmosphere. That space station is mostly western technology and not technology developed by the Russians. And our shuttles are getting beyond their scheduled life-cycle as reusable vehicles -sad as it is to say, an event like this was going to happen. The Russians, after nearly twenty years of trying, still can’t put a shuttle/reusable vehicle into space — again, cause the West won’t sell em the real good stuff and they can’t produce it properly for some odd reason.
Russian space technology still lags behind us by at least a decade or more. Indeed, you should know that most of the component parts of American and Japanese make and design — what Russian technology is up there is EXTREMELY limited at best. And that comes from a friend of mine who actually works at NASA and knows the station very well.
I can’t really speak to the Chinese killer satellite incident because, frankly, a lot of people in defense agencies think the whole thing was overblown. But who knows — the Chinese have been pushing the technology envelope pretty hard and may have reached that point — that doesn’t mean their missile systems are any better nor does it mean they wouldn’t have given/sold that to crazy Kim Jong-Il or the nutty mullahs in Tehran.
Besides, the U.S. has had the technology to kill satellites since the Reagan Administration — and from what I have read tonight, it ain’t all that complicated an event anyway. In fact, one report I saw said that the Japanese defense agency believes the whole thing may have been rigged (which, given Chinese history in these matters, not beyond the realm of possibility). Maybe its wishful thinking on the part of the Japanese…they do have alot to lose if the Chinese go space weapon capable.
Oh, and Bill, I never said the technology was backward — merely old and out of date. The systems designed to defeat these missiles have upgraded (in the real sense)ten-fold in the last two decades.
The missiles can still kill billions of people, I am merely saying that the Iranian arsenal of weaponary, by and large, is ten to twenty years behind everyone else.
These NK missiles they bought are based on a decade or older technology — the term “upgrade” is very nearly a joke if not an outright lie — no matter what the NY Times is saying. For example, the targeting systems for Russian/Chinese/North Korean missiles are prone to failure because they are built with sub-standard (read: Cheap)parts. The launching mechanisms are also prone to heavy failure rates and are not well insulated against key outside elements like, say, desert sand. And don’t even get me started on how poorly the missiles themselves are constructed…
And, AGAIN, keep in mind there is no way on this earth the Russians are gonna give the crazy f(*&)(&*ing Iranian mullahs top-flight weapons systems — even if they are strapped for hard currency. The cost/benefit analysis is not in their favor politically — for either the short or long-term.
Let me also remind you of the story of the MIG-25 that was stolen by a defecting Soviet pilot in the 1980′s and was flown to Japan. The U.S., upon inspecting the aircraft, were stunned by how piss-poor the technology was then. Fast forward nearly 30 years and, while they have improved some, even the MIG-31 and Sukhoi ground attack planes of today are not as advanced as Western aircraft.
The Chinese aircraft are in much the same condition — and are actually probably better than the Russians (although word has it Chinese pilots are half as well trained as our guys).
Barbara, you are correct about Khamenei hold on the military and intelligence services. The same was said of the Shah — and yet, he was damn near strung up in the public square along with most of the dreaded “SAVAK” security services (most of which were trained by the British and the Americans I might add).
Indeed, I believe Khamenei’s smack down of Ahmandinejad was a deliberate signal to convince the West that the Iranians would never fire off a missile at Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Qatar or Amman for that matter. Khamenei, if nothing else, is not stupid. He knows what the situation is in his country. The economy is mired in a two-decade long slump, democratic ideals are squelched and people are beginning to reject a religion they have never really had any historical connection to in the first place. He knows a revolution of moderate elements could spring forth any moment if the populace gets worried enough that their country is in real danger with the Guardian Council in charge.
And soldiers are, by and large, different from intelligence officers. Soldiers, even the generals, see and feel the cost of their actions — they still have a feel for the pulse of the people (as it were). I think Khamenei’s control is as limited as it might be given the situation — after all, the revolution is only two-plus decades old and the old generals that are still left remember the firing squads.
Often, we make the mistake of thinking Iran is the Iran of 1979. It is not. The country and its society are changing rapidly (that being a relative term in the Arab/Islamic world) and the mullahs are not equipped to deal with it. More to the point, at its heart, Iran is not an Islamic country. It is Persian — and the Persians were not of the Islamic faith. It is a dichotomy that Iranians of every generation are still fighting against.
Indeed, while I am no expert, I liken the 1979 Islamic Revolution to the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. In no way, should Bolshevism/communism, with its basis in the Industrial Revolution, ever taken root in an agrarian/feudal nation like early 20th Century Russia. The idelogical and historical relevance to the system simply wasn’t there. Some real experts argue that was one of the principle reasons for its eventual failure.
In that way, I believe the Islamic Revolution in Iran is doomed to failure. Iran is not a true nation of the Islamic faith — the history doesn’t support it. In fact, it could be argue that the 1979 Revolution only holds real political/economic sway in Tehran and the major metropolitan (such as they are) areas of Iran. In other regions, it still remains as if it never happened despite Iranian government efforts at bringing this populace to heal.
But what do I know, its 2:45am and I writing this crap simply cause I can’t sleep.
By the way, sorry for the long posts.
Iran is backward, behind everything and we should attack it.
Ho-kay.
CADTS:”In that way, I believe the Islamic Revolution in Iran is doomed to failure. Iran is not a true nation of the Islamic faith — the history doesn’t support it.”
That’s not our battle or our business…what is our business is seeing to that Iran stops its support of terrorism, stops behaving in a renegade manner and joins the international community by operating with a more PRAGMATIC government… in 1980′s we saw signs of this..we are seeing signs (small but they are there)of this again… among the mullahs there has ALWAYS been pragmatists and radicals struggling for control in Iran…The US needs to take both diplomatic and military positions (showing strength as we are now is good and having a positive impact)and actions that allow Rafsanjani (or his delegate) to succeed the Khamenei…
You say “Iran is not the Iran of 1979″ On that you are right, but not for the reasons you state … it is a regional power now, with terrorists surrogates (Hezbollah, Hamas,and others)positioned to make trouble throughout the Middle east and Centra Asia…along with a little help from “their friends” Russia and China, it will be a thorn in our sides for decades to come …
Finally, it’s a mistake to underestimate the hold the hardliners have on the military and the intelligence elites …and their control of the Iranian “street” It’s an even bigger mistake to understimate the appeal of Islam even its more fundamentalist approach to practices to many diverse people around the ENTIRE world …extremist Islamic groups have adopted extreme idelogical programs that have perverted a very honorable religion for a political purpose …(and oh yeah, I did sorta know that Iran is Persian not Arab!)
Have a good day…I am off to ride.
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee says he’s running for president. I’d like to see him use the Bustamante “I was very fat” campaign strategy. We can never get too much of that.
I wish I was as simply as fix Iran and that fixes everything.
Maybe “I Heart Huckabees” plays into his strategy somehow.
Barbara, I disagree almost entirely. Iran is our battle and it damn sure is our business.
The mullahs are not moderates and pragmatism is also not in the vocabulary of the religious zealot — particularly those running the Guardian Council. They see their cause as a message from God and they are not likely to be deterred from it. If it means killing millions of “non-believers”, these lunatics will gladly do it.
Starting/supporting a real insurgency in Iran will force their government to reconsider their options.
And Iran is not a regional “power” in the sense we think of it. The only real regional powers in the Middle East are Israel, Egypt and, to some extent, the Syrians.
A regional power must have, ultimately the political AND economic will to change political situations and, ultimately,sustain combat/military (the sword point of diplomacy) against a foreign power (s) — without having their own government fall apart. The Iranians do not possess such abilities at this point. Their political situation is tenuous at best and the economy is in even deeper trouble.
However, I will say, economically, you are probably closer to the mark — only because of oil. But even then, the Iranian economy is in a shambles. International investment, save for oil, is gone. No one wants to work with a government like Iran’s and they seems to have the inability to attract such investment.
And in an escalating or wartime situation, Iranian ports would be blockaded and their hard currency would be frozen in European banks. The situation would then become dire for the Iranians.
Thats why the Iranians are nibbling at the edges in the region and not really engaging their enemies. They can’t afford it and they know it.
Also, he hardliners are the ones who will hold out to the end — and will be the ones to be publicly shot in the square. The “elites”, as you call them, are as willing to switch sides as anyone can be — as long as they can demonstrate their loyalty to the new government and protect their power.
(BTW, most people don’t know that Iran is a Persian, not an Islamic, nation…you get a gold star from me for knowing that.)
Bill, your usual sarcasm aside…my opinions are based in real politik of the region.
This is not easy and the situation cannot be resolved in the way you and others proscribed. It just won’t happen with talking at the U.N.
Your characterization of what I’ve been saying is quite erroneous.
>This is not easy and the situation cannot be resolved in the way you and others proscribed. It just won’t happen with talking at the U.N.
So, skimming through these very long posts, I am gathering that Iran is a really weak country that somehow controls the play in Iraq. We need to start a low-intensity conflict inside Iran, and …
Actually, Iran is a very serious regional power. Israel is deeply threatened by it. Trust me. Iran was held in check by the existence of Iraq as a serious political entity. Things go from there.
Mr. Bradley:”Actually, Iran is a very serious regional power. Israel is deeply threatened by it. Trust me. Iran was held in check by the existence of Iraq as a serious political entity. Things go from there.”
Exactly.. and the Saudi’s (and their leadership role among Arabs)also feel very threatened…and the Mullahs in Iran (and everywhere else for that matter) are NOT going away anytime soon!!!!…
Moreover,cadts, your charge that the “the mullahs are not moderates and pragmatism is also not in the vocabulary of the religious zealot .” ..is much too simplistic, not correct, and even biased.
Again, some are pragmatists and some are radicals…If Rafsanjani emerges as the next leader…I shall personally thank my lucky stars, it could be worse and this is someone the world can work with …we have a history with him,as do the Israelis, and many in the EC, he worked actively to improve Iran’s image in the 1980′s He intervened and was pivotal getting hostages freed from TWA847 from Athens hijackng in 1985…it was a HORRIFFIC hijacking and trust me, it would have been a huge disaster if he did not intervened…
This idea that there are masses of people ready to rise up and start shooting the mullahs in the square
is …excuse me,… GOOFY!…hardly an analysis based on “real politik of the region” as you asserted. Moreover, even if this “fantasy” became a reality the Russians and China would immediately move in giving us access problems…there are few positive scenarios right now for the US in the region. We are deeply undermined by the Iraq war. We need to stop MISASSESSING situations and start responding with APPROPRIATE responses to the entire region instead of playing into the strength of radical Islam. It’s another “hearts and minds” campaign we need to wage …we are in now what is for better or worse several decades of something similar to the situation our parents faced in “cold war”…
Further, if you think Europe would cooperate in an attack on Iran in anyway by any means without the US engaging in a fullcourt press in diplomacy, then you know as much about present day Europe as you do about Iran!
Son of Kyoto will have “binding cap and trade”. Well, if this isn’t a recipe for preventing new businesses from starting, nothing is.
Carbon dioxide emissions are allocated among existing emitters. What happens to anyone wishing to establish a new emitter?
And this is all for what? To stop the sea level from rising 17 inches over the next century? To stop the frost line from moving a hundred miles north, opening much of Canada to agriculture?
Nick
Then nothing, to follow your line of thought, does prevent new businesses from starting, because that is not how cap and trade systems work.
I do so enjoy our friends from the right-wing. When denial fails, they say climate change is a good thing!
First, the Israelis, while very concerned about the Iranians, are not as worried as you think from a military standpoint. They are more concerned to the point of the Iranians getting a nuclear weapon — the Saudis have much the same concern. Neither is worried about the Iranian Army screaming across the border of Iraq and down the Arabian pennisula.
That is why Iran is not a regional power as much as they are a “rogue” nation with the power to cause trouble and conduct limited conflicts without getting their hands dirty. And that’s the reality.
Perhaps my explanation isn’t coming across well enough…
A true “regional power” must have the economic, political and military will to engage your enemies where and when necessary. The Iranians, as I said before, don’t have that. They know it and we know it.
However, as I said before Bill, the Iranians do have the ability to be real troublemakers. And that is sometimes a worse thing to have in the region. They control the insurgency through financial help and tactical/strategic advice — BUT if you find a way to destabilize Iran and you will see how quickly their attention gets diverted. In turn, the dominos will cause the insurgency, devoid of its largest political and financial backer, to eventually fall apart.
Bill, the biggest check on Iran was not necessarily Iraq. Don’t get me wrong, Saddam was useful in doing some of that in the region. But the real check has been, and likely will be, the Israelis, the Saudis and the Americans. And the biggest check of all on the Iranians are the Iranians themselves.
Here is why.
1.) The Iranian military is, despite what you think, not capable of fighting a sustain military conflict. Their equipment, by and large, is ten or twenty years old. Spare parts for key elements like aircraft are in short supply, particularly since no one is making the aircraft they are “flying.”
2.) The Iranian economy is in the crapper. Investment, outside of oil, ain’t there. And oil doesn’t provide all of the jobs a nation the size of Iran needs to truly move forward. The country has to have a reasonably diversified economy that can sustain itself with limited outside imports in the event of a conflict.
3.) The mullahs, once again, are not given to pragmatism — primarily because of how they came to power and how they want to stay in power. Were pragmatism part of their vocabulary, as I said, Ahmadinejad would never have come to power in the first place. I remind you that when the “moderate” elements of the Iranian government, including the previous President, were running, many of the moderate PM’s candidates weren’t allowed to run. It was the Guardian Council and the mullahs who were the final arbiters of who can and can’t run in Iranians elections.
Besides, Rafsanjani is 72 YEARS OLD FOR CHRISSAKES…how realistic is it for you to consider this guy has a real chance in moving the nation. Not to mention, the guy’s health is what you would expect from a 72 YEAR OLD living in a country whose health care system that ranks, according to the WHO, damn near the bottom in the world. Barbara, if that is what you are basing your hope on for Iran, I would find some new lucky stars.
4.) Where the Iranians forced to engage the Americans/West in a conflict they start, the country will fall apart economically and politically. In that event, you can bet your last dollar that the mullahs will all be lined in the central square of Baghdad and shot. Don’t doubt it for a second.
And my thinking is hardly simplistic — its just different and, frankly more realistic, than yours. Believe me, you aren’t dealing with a national leadership that works within the realm of civilized diplomatic ideals. In fact, no nation does — its idealistic nonsense to believe otherwise.
Heavy thinking from somebody that thought Angerlides could win if somebody else ran his campaign. lol
Actually Ann, I never said that…I merely said that Phil stood a better chance if someone who was actually competent ran his campaign…
But didn’t we slay that dragon already???
Briefly…while you are being what you call “realistic” in your musings…
Saudia Arabia is with some sucess very busy creating a Sunni Axis (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Kuwait -and even it appears Pakistan is being courted)) to be a counter weight Iran’s significant and growing influence in the region.
moreover, serious reports out are hinting that after some verbal sparring it appears Iran and Saudia Arabia are coming to the conclusion that it is in their interest, in interest of the region, and most importantly, from their perspective as 2 powerful conservative Muslim religious states, it is in the Muslim’s world’s interest that they try to create some workable, sustainable relation between them which means most likely down the line divving up an orbit of influence over territory, countries ,sects, issues etc which each ideally will respect with consequences if either’s orbit of influence is violated….
BTW, the very unpragmatic ruler of Iran (another sick old man like you insist Rafsanjani is!) is doing the most pragamatic of things …he is inviting in the Russians via the UN in to resolve and defend Iran’s nuclear program. And, i just so happens that the ambassador of Iran invited the press in to explain it will help the US rebuld Iran…
It’s time for diplomacy. These “old sick unpragmatic mullahs” in many ways appear to be more clever and nimble politically than this Administration and many of our leaders in Congress.
I’m am not a believer in pissing contests…which is what this is beginning to resemble. I am replying because I personally believe you are throwing out a great deal of erroneous info based on my knowledge of the region after living and working there… in regard to security issues and issues of regional conflict, I have to say, I had the best teacher in the world…and if he had lived, Israel would not be in the VERY precarious position it finds itself in at this moment due to both internal and external forces…so reply if you must, but this is it for me…Lyla Tov
You know, CADTS, when you came on here last year and told us that Susan Kennedy and Steve Schmidt were at each other’s throats on Team Arnold Schwarzenegger, I told you you were wrong about that. Which, of course, you were.
Under your analysis, Israel, which just failed in the war against Hezbollah, would not be a regional power.
Bill…I never said they were at each other’s throats…I said it was possible, it was a rumor going around Sacramento (probably started by Mike Spence, et. al.) and that should have been a concern. And why the heck is that relevant here???
So lets stop making this somewhat personal — just because I disagree with you — and speak to the original point.
Israel is a regional power for the EXACT REASONS I stated. They have the ability to secure their borders with a strong military, a significant economy that has the ability to survive with a limited economy and they damn sure have the political will to conduct a war — even it fails — and still have a government that survives and prospers. Yes, they failed in one sense against Hezbollah and yet the nation survives and will continue to thrive. Iran would not enjoy such a luxury…
Israel has a strong export economy and a growing hi-tech industrial base. Its port cities,like Haifa, are heavy transit points for international shipping and continue to be so. Iran has ports but they aren’t shipping anything on significance other than oil. And, unlike Israel, can’t afford to lose a single one.
For the last time, Iran is not a regional power because they lack most of those critical components. They are a rogue nation operating under what is fast becoming borrowed time.
Barbara, you make very interesting points. But this is the Middle East, not Western Europe. Diplomacy is neither something the Iranians care about or wish to engage in — because diplomacy does nothing for them. And why is that? Because they aren’t dealing from a position of strength — even with the potential for nuclear weapons. And, with your knowledge of the Middle East, you should know that, internally, the current leadership in Iran believes that diplomatic solutions with the West makes them look inherently weak. Their saber rattling is for internal consumption to show that the leadership of the country is not afraid to stand up to the West or their client states of Saudi Arabia and Israel (and yes, the mullahs of Iran perceive the Saudis as such — since before 1991 I believe.)
And, please Barbara/Bill, please tell me what is erroneous about what I am saying about Iran, its current economic status, its political status or the status of its military. Or their lack of a presence as a regional power.
I am not in favor of blowing Iran to the moon and back. Thats foolishness. But Iran’s ability to conduct operations in Iraq can and should be curbed. You do that and you can certainly speed up the process of bringing our kids home and stabilizing the country.
And Bill, just because I disagree with you doesn’t make them wrong certainly — just a different take with facts to back them up.
You were floating the Schwarzenegger discord story here, CADTS. (Who is not DTS.) I always call people on that, especially when they are dead wrong.
Actually I am now DTS…but hey, thanks for taking the time to review my voter registration info.
And, with that, I am out.
soooo Iran does not like diplomacy…
well I don’t think the Russians or the Chinese have that belief …and I am certain that any SERIOUS person working in US Foreign Policy does not believe that either….
Barbara:
You clearly don’t know many serious people in foreign policy or they simply don’t get it.
Just to respond once and , for hopefully the last time, here it is.
1.) I didn’t say Iran didn’t like
like diplomacy — I said, there isn’t any benefit for them. If you aren’t going to read the posts carefully, then try not to comment.
2.) And the really serious people who actually work in the region have said repeatedly Iran’s greatest threat is a “rogue nation” with a nuclear weapon. They are not a regional power in any sense of the word.
3.) You are wrong about the Russians and the Chinese. The Russians still need vast sums of hard currency…and they would sell plutonim sh-t from Chernoybl to Iran if it meant gaining access to hard currency. And, once again, the Russians and the Chinese did not sell the Iranians the good stuff in military hardware.
Oh, and the Russians and Chinese don’t want a real diplomatic relationships with Iran because they don’t trust the mullahs either. And you and your serious people should know why.
In case you don’t, here’s why: China has a growing Muslim/Islamic minority and the Russians have a similar and larger problem (remember Chechnya). They will do business with Iran but they, like most of the real world, know what the real intents of these mullahs and will keep them at arms length in the end. Because Iran, while proclaiming their love and friendship for Russia and China, are surreptiously giving aid and support to Islamic groups in Chechnya and Azerbejian.
4.)And Russia/China will damn sure won’t come to their aid in the event of conflict with the U.S./West. And you should know that given your vast knowledge of Mideast politics.
After reading you I only have one concern …you were here pushing Biden not so long ago..who I admire …I can only hope and pray that you do not represent his or his staff’s level of sophistication and knownledge when assessing and responding to Foreign Policy issues…because if I really thought that it would be really unnerving…
And don’t tell me when I can and cannot comment…Mr. Bradley is the ONLY one around here you can do that…
What happened to the good old days of Phil Angelides, good candidate or bad candidate? lol
Barbara:
Whether you know it or not, Biden has held much the same belief about Iran. For him and others who actually work in the field, they deal in realisms, not in academic exercises.
And no, you shouldn’t respond to comments where you haven’t read the entire post…your responses make alot more sense that way.
And BTW, you have YET to tell me how my facts of Iran are wrong.