José Maria Aznar declines:
This is no time for hesitation on the part of the West. If, as part of an attempt to reach an agreement on the Iranian nuclear program, the leaders of democratic nations turn their backs on the dissidents they will be making a terrible mistake.
President Obama has said he refuses to “meddle” in Iran’s internal affairs, but this is a poor excuse for passivity. If the international community is not able to stop, or at least set limits on, the repressive violence of the Islamic regime, the protesters will end up as so many have in the past — in exile, in prison, or in the cemetery. And with them, all hope for change will be gone.
The former prime minister of Spain paid a political price for participating in the liberation of 25 million Iraqi minds. Politicians elsewhere took notice, and put their heads back in the sand.
It’s far easier to negotiate the rate at which our fundamental values decline in the world than defend and extend them.
Of course, not everyone feels that way.
It’s odd. I find myself hesitating to jest with our host these days. I have tremendous respect for him; cannot imagine how he juggles family, flying, job and blog and so, these few occasions when the curtain moves and Oz declaims in Latin…..well. I’m just not yielding to temptation. One might even say that I have delclined. What was that origin of your c/s?…
Media types pretending they are important in the world. I think not. This is just more of the beau geste that liberals love to substitute for action and risk.
The reality of the Iranian elections is that two different thugs were nominated by two different kleptarchies. Ahmadenihad (sic) may be a little more Hellbent than the other, but there’s really no difference, certainly not where it matters to the West. The kids in the street, however much they appear to resemble Tianenmen Square protesters, or other freedom fighters, are chanting “Allahu akhbar” as they hurl their rocks, which should be more than enough of a clue that this isn’t our fight. However, exploiting Iranian internal discord should be the highest priority. Not much chance of that, though.
Zane/
Agree. We should be doing everything possible to sow internal discord and make trouble in general for the theocratic crowd now in control in Iran. “Bettering the life” of the “young” in Iran is NOT the job of an American President unless it somehow simultaneously advances this nation’s vital interests–the care and tender of which while keeping an eye towards the objective of advancing the lot of the American electorate IS the job (indeed the ONLY job) of any elected official. IOW, coldly put, if it is necessary for the people of Iran to suffer in order to advance American interests, so be it.
The betterment of their lot is the job of THEIR leaders, NOT ours–unless, of course the betterment of their lot also advances the betterment of ours.
Virgil, your comment has stuck in my head, taunting me.
Although with reflection, I can understand and agree with what you’re saying up to a point, it still sticks somewhere. I am thinking about Iraq now and how one of the assertions often made (certainly not the only one but still often relied on) is along the lines that the US did such a wonderful thing for the people of Iraq in getting rid of Saddam, that they freed them from his cruel dictatorship. And although you might argue that, in that case, what was in the Iraqis’ best interests was also in the US’ interests, does that mean that you would also agree with the US government actively supporting the creation or continued survival of another Saddam there or elsewhere if that was somehow considered to be in your best interests? To hell with the people who actually have to live there?
I realize there is a difference between not intervening to overthrow a government and actively helping create or support a regine, but the question still remains. And there would seem to be something very off in a country that on one hand proclaims itself as a force for *good* in the world, a shining light as it were, while at the same time doing “whatever” it deems in its best interest, no matter the consequences to anyone else. The word hypocritical might come to mind.
I’m not talking about the situation in Iran here (I really have no clue what the answer is to that) but just in general.
Michelle/
Please have patience–I’ve got to run and won’t have time for adequate reply until late tonight PCT, so check back in this space tomorrow if you will… I just must beg off for now…
Teh vid is just so much self-stroking fluff. No one in that studio is bleeding, unlike many in Iran who really don’t give big rat’s @$$ about what they have to say. Put your money and life where your mouth is.
Unlike Chamberlain, oops, sorry, BHO, at least these guys are saying that they support the Iranian people in their quest.
How much is it worth, or does it make a difference? Darned if I know, but it is certainly more worthy than not saying anything. Or, pulling a BHO.
Sorry Lex but what I find interesting (or sickening) is how hardline conservatives such as yourself didn’t have a word of criticism for Bush, as he and his administration stood by in September 2007 when the military junta government of Burma crushed the tens of thousands of monks and their supporters seeking democracy in that country (a military junta that continues to imprison the last lawfully elected leader of the counrty).
But now you’re all suddenly interested in the democratic rights of the Iranian people to elect one Israel hater over another (all candidates in the Iranian election of course having been pre-approved by the ruling theocracy).
This is the problem with what’s left of the GOP base. They really don’t stand for anything anymore except attacking the president and most of the voters have seen right through it.
Sorry Ben, but your knowledge of even recent history is woefully deficient:
Or if it is not, then your commitment to human freedom varies with the political party of the president in office.
Lex, I don’t think he had much choice.
Scott/
Would your knowledge of the psychology of married relationships and the “power of a woman” regarding such things perhaps be informed by personal experience?
(Not that any of such considerations EVER apply to MY marriage.
)
We rednecks subscribe to the theory, “If Mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.” Tried it the other way in my first trip to the matrimonial rodeo.
Guess GWB is just smarter to get it right the first time. Like you. Maybe you guys had heard of Lysistrata before I did.
Ben’s knowledge might be somewhat short, but all you’ve pointed out there Lex is that Bush’s public “outrage” achieved nothing. I believe that the same scum that crushed those monks are still in charge.
So basically what you’re advocating is that Obama follow the brilliant leadership of the last GOP president and express public outrage at the Iranian leadership and then he’ll be able to achieve the same sterling results Bush achieved in Mynamar? ie all the protesters crushed and whisked off to be executed behind closed doors.
Face it, for all the faux outrage of the GOP, Obama has basically been doing the most positive thing he could do and that is keep us out of it. Because getting involved is bound to achieve great results.
Myanmar hasn’t threatened anyone but their own people. Your inability to see the difference between that regime, and one who’s stated policy is to wipe a democracy and US ally, off the map, and who wages proxy wars around the world often against American interests, is astonishing.
Or conveniently myopic. Same net effect.
So Ben’s comment was essentially “fake but accurate?” And it’s best to just keep our mouths shut about those fundamental human rights we pretend to hold sacred? Because if we speak too forcefully the Iranian regime might us that as an excuse to crack skulls? Or even demand an apology, since we’ve been giving them out so freely?
Got it.
I think that Ben’s lack of response to this is instead of Defending Silence, a very much Defining silence. Well done Lex.
Well, it’s better than that egregious “We are the world” but probably just as effective. That was a very very bad decade for music.
Nice thought I suppose.
So funny to see the rank partisans like Ben coming out of the woodwork. Procrustean logic, anyone?
Equally funny, but simultaneously saddening, is the attempt by The One’s sycophants to deem any criticism of passive-aggressive diplomacy as eagerness to invoke only the military intervention option. Or to question any lack of eagerness to invade any regime demonstrating egregious behavior as rank hypocrisy.
What these blinded souls fail to understand, is that there are relative levels of egregious behavior — and each requires an appropriate response. Countries that have despots in charge, but no danger to America or its allies need containment, and not much more. Put Hugo Chavez and Omar al-Bashir in that category (maybe even the House of Saud qualifies as well!). Then, we move on to those with bad behavior, and threaten US allies — like the mullahs of Iran. They need the strongest possible isolation, and condemnation. They need active alliance building by the US to achieve those ends. Their internal opposition needs to be encouraged, and aided. DPRK in this bunch as well. Then, we get on to despots who threaten the US. In 2002, the unanimous opinion of the world intelligence community was that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. The moral clarity of 20/20 hindsight can legitimately question if Iraq intended to use those weapons against the US. But the threat was real, and the world intelligence community agreed.
The fact that The One, and his tongue-bathers in the press, can’t see the difference, is just another example of the inexperience that we chose last fall. Here’s hoping we survive until 1-20-2013.
Scott/
Survival? Ya got any xtra room in your bomb shelter? I’d like to know just in case we get caught out in the cold while passing thru your neck of the woods when the riots start and/or the big one is dropped.
BTW, what’s the password? Sure don’t want any friendly-fire incidents. 
Of course, if Obama successfully implements his inane energy policies we’re all going to slowly freeze to death anyway, so the crazies will be too numb to riot, and there won’t be enough gas avail. for them to hop in their cars and Mad Max us. But then we really don’t have to worry about THAT anyway, do we? ‘Cause WE have all the guns and Obama supporters don’t. The fools don’t believe in ‘em (except for the criminals–Obama voters all.)
(But then there’s Holder’s gun-control proposals still floating out there–and those tucked away in the fine print of the Teddycare health proposal–so maybe I shouldn’t speak too soon…..)
PS to SCOTT:
On further reflection about the societal break-down scenario my plan would be for all of us to head for the nearest college campii and steal, erm, “borrow” all the Faculty’s Volvos at gunpoint–they’d make GREAT cars to tool around in–nice safety ratings and all that–and it would serve ‘em right–could even throw in a good thrashing (as commenter Butch recently recommended here, IIRC) on general principles alone before we take, erm, temp. commandeer, all their stuff. Besides, whose to stop us? All the Univ. administrators have made college campuses gun-free zones.PPS-I get the SAAB!
VX, it’s a little OT, but I highly recommended to jaded and pickled old souls such as yourself The Camp of the Saints by Jean Raspaill. Written in 1973, he predicted Europe’s future with astounding clarity. The other day I read a news story about a refugee camp on the French side of the England-France tunnel, with more than a thousand illegals impounded in it who were caught trying to sneak to England. Apparently word has gone out to the great unwashed who are coming to storm the camp and tear down the fences in the name of a Europe without borders. It’s a scene that could have come straight out of this book. Highest possible recommendation to anyone who remembers what conservatism actually once was, and who has the requisite sense of humor to laugh as the new social order marches us into the gas chambers.
Zane/
Already read it, and I saw the news rpt about the Chunnel as well. The radio talk show guy out of Atlanta, Neil Boortz, refers to “Camp of the Saints” all the time. And just what WOULD an Obama administration do if half of China or India (or both) set sail for America’s shores? (You will note that the female Mayor of Calais thought such attempts at “Chunnel busting” were peachy-keen as long as it got the mob out of HER hair…)
Of course the left’s handling of the Mexican border question has already given us an ans to my question, haven’t they?
But that was the genius of Raspaill’s vision, to show the million coming all at once. He knew full well the reality that they would come in drips and drabs, although now they come in waves, but that all of the same moral posturing and betrayals would support the slow invasion as surely as the fast one. Having read it, it’s amazing how many of those characters actually exist and dominate Europe’s “political leadership.” And even more clearly it illustrates that the disease is cultural relativism, that it’s probably terminal in Europe’s case, and that Islam is an opportunistic infection, not the underlying cause of Europe’s sickness.
No, the USA is not far behind, either.
VX/
Suggest you head for the student parking lots. Believe it or not, they have the better cars!
You have to really work hard to freeze to death here in sandy eggo. Which is not to say that dozens of non Americans don’t freeze to death here every year…something to do with deciding to be barefoot winter mountaineers and occasional new tourists who think that a stroll through the hi desert and mountains is just the thing for new immigrants looking for a place in the sun.
Scott/
Yes, and unlike the Pelopennesian War, the War of the Sexes never ends….
A good friend of mine, Angus Lind, a recently retired (pushed out under budget-cutting, I hear–haven’t talked to him yet) columnist for the Times-Pic once quoted another old saying in a column appropos of marriage from the male perspective and the dilemma oft presented us: “You can be right–or you can be happy.” LOL!! (of course the wimmins come right back and always claim they’re never happy ’cause we’re never right!
)
Virgil …James Thurber referred to the ongoing skirmishes between husbands and wives as “the war between men and women” and wrote, and drew, some funny stuff about it. It’s there and it’s true, all right. At this point in life, I regard it as the necessary little scuffling and turning to make the puzzle pieces fit together the way they’re s’posed to. So we can enjoy that little sigh of relief when they do fit.
Marianne
Marianne/
LOL. So true, so true. Thurber was a classic. He was still writing and doing cartoons for the New Yorker when I was a child–some really, really slyly funny stuff. I used to leaf thru old back issues just to catch his cartoons, among others. The New Yorker had great, great cartoons in those days. Today? Doesn’t seem the same; probably just me though….
Marianne, Virgil, I keep a copy of Let Your Mind Alone next to my bed, just to help me stay sane.