« Irony
Center of Attention
Sep 4th, 2007 | 4 responses
A round up of recent posts by various bloggers who either attempt to strike a balanced note on heated debates and controversial issues, or improve our ability to find our own sense of balance by exposing us to new information and different points-of-view.
Kevin Sullivan offers a thoughtful look at what we can and can’t do about Iran.
Amba considers a Presidential candidate whose religious beliefs don’t supercede his respect for the rights of non-believers. (Who this candidate is may surprise you.)
In his farewell installment at The Daily Dish, Steve Clemons is disturbed by the prevalence of the practice of book-banning in this country. He concludes: “Not much else to say really — but the struggle between reason and dogma requires us to keep our eyes and minds open.”
Justin Gardner looks at Dem-leaning independents and moderates, encouraging the Party of the Donkey not to take those voters for granted.
Dyre42 looks at the implications of an information technology “cold war.”
Tip of the Day: For those who enjoy Michael J. Totten’s posts, he has a new article slated for the latest edition of Reason magazine, titled “The Next Iranian Revolution.”
opinions powered by SendLove.to
4 Responses to “Center of Attention”
[...] solid post on the subject without succumbing to the temptation to engage in China-bashing (hat tip: The Moderate Voice). Dyre42 makes just the right point: I’ve spoken on this before but we really need to get [...]
I read Kevin Sullivan’s piece twice to make sure I understood his message. While he claims to not want war with Iran, it is clear that he feels that unless Iran does what America wants, we have no choice but to smash them.
Iran has a legitimate international legal right to process fuel for nuclear plants. We do not want them to have that capability because we feel they will not stop at civilian use but go to a military next step. Okay, I understand and agree with the US position. Normally in a capitalistic system if someone has something you want, you buy it from them. How much did we offer Iran for their nuclear capability? The answer is zero, instead we want to bully them into selling it for free. So far our diplomacy is all stick and very little carrot. Until I see a legitimate offer on the table by the US, I would advise Iran to say NO.
Kevin is also very condescending. It seems to gall him that a two bit country like Iran should even have a seat at the table with the GREAT AMERICANS. He barely acknowledges that the Soviets were close to a big power and so sitting at the same table was repugnant but necessary. In Kevin’s eyes the world is a fuedal society with the US as the Lord of the Manor and all the rest are riff raff.
Well jd, I think maybe third time might be the charm in your case.
1. Iran’s nuclear capabilities at the moment are virtually nil. They are dependent on Russia and other nations for their refinery needs, despite their massive reserves. Unlike most critics, I BELIEVE Ahmadinejad when he attributes the nuclear program to an attempt to diversify their energy production. We could learn a thing or two.
However, let’s not be foolish. Russia offered to facilitate the production of nuclear energy for the Republic, and they snubbed Putin. They sit above some of the greatest oil and natural gas reserves on the planet. Why not open up contracts to improve domestic refinery, as opposed to exporting it all? Nuclear power, unless heavily invested in, can’t even account for the urban electricity needs that the country will have.
They want the bomb. Experts all over the spectrum acknowledge this, as do most Democratic presidential candidates.
I have no idea where you’re going with the buying energy stuff, you lost me.
2. I’m sorry you sense condescension, but I hold a great deal of respect for the Iranian people and their beautiful country. But I am first and foremost an American, and yes, our own security needs much hold precedence. Furthermore, the UN has placed two levels of economic sanctions on Iran in order to curb their nuclear ambitions. Russia is halting nuclear facility construction until Iran steps in line with the international community. This is not simply American “bullying,” but rather, a matter of global security.
Iran doesn’t just threaten Israel, our strategic ally. They will use the bomb as means to threaten ALL of their neighbors, especially Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt.
3. You again make no sense in bringing up the Soviets. I think you in fact made my own point.
The Soviets were deserving of equal seating at our table. Are you arguing that Iran deserves the same level of legitimacy? The Iranian regime has not only been deemed “riff raff” by us, but by the entire global community.
So what’s your point here?
Kevin – The Iranians are proud people. As an American you can understand that attitude. They believe they have the brains and scientic know how to produce nuclear energy by themselves. After being categorized as an evil country, I’m sure their paranoia about relying on a third party (like Russia) to provide them with fuel leads them to suspect that fuel could be cut off in the future.
As I stated I don’t trust the Iranians not to proceed from civilian nuclear energy to nuclear weapons. That is why I agree with the US to try to prevent this step. However, lets try some carrots. You correctly point out that Iran is desparately short of refining capacity. How about the US building them 20 refineries in return for a “trust but verify” solution to their electricity needs. It would be a Hell of a lot cheaper for the US than going to war with Iran.
We are NOT going to scare the Iranians into cooperating with us. One of the big problems both the US and Israel have in the mideast is our repective inability to allow the other party any sense of pride or “face”. ( ps I am a Jew who used to live in Israel and I know the people well) We insist on rubbing their noses in the dirt so that our pride and face has more room to grow. If you want to solve the problem with Iran, sit down and talk with them. They are a 3500 year old civilization and to contemptuously dismiss them as “riff raff” will lead to a dead end.
We should be trying to bring Iran into the family of nations with extensive economic and cultural exchanges – not forcing them to stay on the outside. Our approach to Iran reminds me of our approach to Cuba. My guess is if we had dropped the embargo 30 years ago, Cuba would not be communist but probably our 51st state.
Kevin, I have lived most of my adult life outside the US in 12 different countries as a result of business. The most important tool I had was empathy. What was it in the people and culture that I could address that made sense from a business perspective. If we put ourselves in the shoes of the Iranians perhaps we could come up with a solution that satisfies both parties.