09.30.09

Without being prepared for talks to fail, we’ll be on the losing side of the next phase

Posted in Iran at 2:26 pm by Administrator

Michael Rubin of the American Enterprise Institute says it’s crucial for us to be militarily prepared even as we sit down in Geneva with the illegitimate regime in Iran one more time.

And at Pajamas Media, Claudia Rosett says that TCM is still, at this late hour, behaving as if there is no crisis.

  • Share/Bookmark

20 Comments »

  1. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 2:32 pm

    As far as I am concerned, our statecraft is with China, Russia and European counterparts, not with Iran.

  2. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 2:40 pm

    Michael Rubin is a Richard Perle protoge: a neocon and a jew and therefore obviously wants all negotiations and statecraft to fail, so I do not listen to him.

  3. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    September 30, 2009 at 2:44 pm

    I’m sure you don’t.

  4. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    September 30, 2009 at 2:44 pm

    Myself, though, I’m pleased to provide a way for his message to get spread more widely.

  5. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 3:28 pm

    Israel apparently refuses to talk on any terms but theirs, the Muslim/Arab world is splintered into many hateful factions, and we here in the USA are split too, so much so that our opinions on Israel and the Middle East determine our patriotism and our resolve, for some people. Of course there’s absolute truth for those who believe their truth absolutely. The Kingdom of Heaven is here, if we work for it; otherwise, it’s obviously onto Armageddon. Some people/factions seem to want that. I will admit that there might again come a time, nay we’re always in that, still, it seems, for “limited” military action to forestall the spread unto greater conflagration which, for those who remember history and the increasing terror and horror of a wide and wider war for the flora, fauna, the beasts and the children, as well as all we have built from our spark of the Divine, will only bring hell on earth, again. The way I read Rubin is statecraft will fail and I damn him for that prediction. He is obviously part of the problem, not part of the solution.

  6. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 3:35 pm

    Counterpoint:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090930/pl_bloomberg/abcuhih186wm;_ylt=Aigrga4yhG4WVDxQaOlOJURv24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTJtYTY2YXZyBGFzc2V0A2Jsb29tYmVyZy8yMDA5MDkzMC9hYmN1aGloMTg2d20EY3BvcwMyBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDc2VjcmV0aXJhbnBs

    The Obama administration is going into these talks with much more leverage than it’s had in a while,” said Gary Sick, who advised three U.S. presidents on national security. “The threat of enhanced sanctions, combined with some pragmatic offer to allow Iran to continue with limited enrichment, could lead to a deal.”

    We’re not going to make a snap judgment on Thursday,” State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said yesterday of the Geneva gathering, at which Iran’s nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, will meet with diplomats from the five permanent United Nations Security Council members — the U.S., Russia, China, France and Britain — plus Germany. Jalili said on state television today Iran would enter the talks with “good intentions.”

    Gary G. Sick (born 1935) is an American academic and analyst of Middle East affairs, with special expertise on Iran, who served on the U.S. National Security Council under Presidents Ford, Carter, and for a couple weeks under Reagan as well. He has authored three books, and is perhaps best known to the wider public for voicing support for elements of the October surprise conspiracy theory regarding the Iran Hostage Crisis and the 1980 Presidential Election. Sick is a retired captain in the U.S. Navy. He received a B.A. from Kansas University in 1957, and later earned a Master of Science degree at George Washington University (1970), followed by a PhD in political science at Columbia University (1973).

  7. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 3:42 pm

    And who says we’re not prepared for talks to fail? But, let’s increase our troop levels in Afghanistan, declare war on Venezuela because Chavez gave Obama a book the neocons don’t like (and are afraid of the ideas therein?), though of course we got some troops leaving Iraq available, but they were lied to and have had their tours extended way beyond what they bargained for, be ready to threaten Russia (though not China, it’s too big and we owe them too much $$$$) if it makes another perceived “wrong move, not to mention be ready to hop on into Honduras to restore order, while we remain militarily prepared to do whatever shock and awe is necessary to show Iran who’s boss.

  8. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    September 30, 2009 at 4:32 pm

    1.) Israel’s position is that any Palestinian negotiating partners must explicitly renounce any mission to destroy it. Take such language out of its organizational charter. (It’s still in the charters of both Fatah and Hamas.) Israel would also like the United Nations to quit sponsoring conferences such as Durbin I and II. It would like to be reassured that any humanitarian aid going to Gaza residents doesn’t get diverted to amassing of Hamas arms. It furthermore cannot abide by the Iran-Syria alliance (which actually also includes North Korea).

    2.) How does Dr. Sick think we’ll be able to get a unified front on serious sanctions? And as far as leverage goes, is he taking into account the three rounds of missile tests over the weekend?

    3.) The book is not what made Venezuela under Chavez our enemy. It was a manifestation of that status. The enemy classification comes from the arming and funding of the FARC guerillas in Colombia, joint naval exercises in the Carribean with Russia, weaponry purchases from Russia, a cozy trade relationship with Iran, and the internal repression in Venezuela (shutting down opposition media, nationalizing oil operations).

  9. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 5:21 pm

    Just how are we going to “confront” all these evils militarily is mainly what I want to know. The only answer is and continues to be statecraft. WWI was supposedly “the war to end all wars” and we all know how that went. Yet you want to talk about resolve and patriotism and all that jazz. Let’s get real here, although we indeed do have an “exceptional” military, it does have its limits, as have all militaries throughout history. We tried hubris and braggadocio. We’re just taking the track that must be taken: statecraft. Opinionations are far from unanimous that Jehovah gave them that land. That’s might be the Judeo part, but the Christian part is a whole other deal entirely….

  10. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 5:22 pm

    More on your points 1, 2. 3 later in this thread and others later. I’m a bit busy with other things (thank God) this day the Lord hath made.

  11. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 5:26 pm

    Your ole nemesis Crying American Eagle says Netanyahu is the anti Christ. Which might not be far from the truth, should WWIII break-out. He sure ain’t Christian.

  12. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 7:14 pm

    1) Israel’s position under Netanyahu is that the West Bank settlements stay, nay they keep on building there. God gave that land to the chosen people, them. That is the main sticking point. To cry about various factions calling for the destruction of Israel (when Israel’s own sitting Minister of Defense under Netanyahu just said barely 10 days ago that Iran cannot obliterate Israel at present, though the reverse is certainly a well-kept secret (shhh, Israel has nukes) is to cry crocodile tears. Yes indeedie, a nice way of putting it is that U.S. ‘regrets’ Netanyahu plan to approve new West Bank homes http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1112403.html Again, admittedly, you know much more about the details and history and all, but, frankly, you are an admitted Christian Zionist and tie the future of the Western world in with Israel. I do not share your fears at all. And I certainly don’t want my grandchildren going down to Sheol (Hebrew afterworld) unwillingly over this fiasco in the sand there. If we’re going to deal with it, we’re going to deal with it diplomatically for as long as possible. And, we are going to have as many countries on board with how it is dealt with as possible. The Jews, as you have been reminded repeatedly here in these threads, constitute less than 1/10 of one per cent of the global population.

  13. Mr. Dings said,

    September 30, 2009 at 7:14 pm

    “Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.” – Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001

  14. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    September 30, 2009 at 9:27 pm

    Yes, I am in favor of the setlements. There are lots of Arabs – Muslim Arabs – living in Israel proper and even serving in the Knesset. Do you really think any Jewish residents – let alone legislators – would be welcome in a Palestinian state?
    So Iran can’t obliterate Israel at present, only severely decimate it with a barrage of conventional-weapon-tipped missiles. So that means there’s no urgency?
    Also, consider Iran’s sponsorship of Hamas and Hizbollah. That’s where those groups’ rockets come from.
    Israel is pretty much alone in the world, since the official UN policy is that it is a villain state, Europe is becoming more anti-Semitic by the day, and now TCM is abandoning it.

  15. Mr. Dings said,

    October 1, 2009 at 2:32 am

    The settlements are obviously thought by many to be a huge obstacle to effective statecraft. Didn’t Ben’s opposition Tipi oppose them as well. It was by no means a landslide victory. I do consider Iran’s sponsorship of Hamas and Hezbollah. Of course that’s why Israel wants us, if not the rest of the world to spank, nay really penalize Iran. Why do the terrorists and many of the men in the street over there hate us so? Obviously, aside from our colonial attitudes, it’s our support of Israel. Why do you hate the UN? Isn’t it primarily because the majority don’t back Israel either. Why is Europe again becoming more anti-Semitic by the day?

  16. Mr. Dings said,

    October 1, 2009 at 12:40 pm

    2) Sick says a deal like Iran-Contra was an attempt to break through. I dunno, can we make any other deals like that? LOL>….

  17. Mr. Dings said,

    October 1, 2009 at 12:44 pm

    Link for the above comment is: http://www.cfr.org/publication/8894/iran_expert_sick_advocates_usiran_dialogue_on_nuclear_issues_iraq.html

    I know, it’s a bit dated. But it demonstrates how long we’ve been dealing with this problem diplomatically. As for getting Russia and China on board, it appears we are getting Russia in our corner. You might say that is because we capitulated to them on the Czech and Polish strategic weapons placements, but Bush appointee Gates says he’s now got a better and more effective idea, hence you are on the outs with Gates. You might more Israeli than you are American, I dunno, you decide.

  18. Mr. Dings said,

    October 1, 2009 at 12:45 pm

    As for China, it seems to me that they know where there bread is buttered these days, but they also don’t trust the deli clerks–US! Can you blame them?

  19. Bentnotesmanhisself said,

    October 1, 2009 at 1:38 pm

    Well, we’ve been dealing with it diplomatically and Iran has been dealing with it duplicitously. We’ve extended carrots and unclenched fists and invitations to embassy weenie roasts, and Iran has kept on sponsoring terrorism and “World Without Zionism” conferences and exchanging technology with Syria and North Korea – and, mostto the point, proceeding with getting a nuclear arsenal.

  20. Mr. Dings said,

    October 1, 2009 at 3:07 pm

    We know, bloggie, we know. We aren’t going to preemptively strike yet though. I don’t know whether that tears you up or not, but some here, and they just happen to be in power now, think the way we went about international diplomacy during the preceding 8 years was the wrong way. It is obvious that you are in pain and want to see this way fail as well. We know we do not have your support. Can we have your prayers?

Leave a Comment