That makes no sense-nor has anything to do with the topic.
Enlightened self interest considers the interests of others.
EDIT :
A character in the sci-fi series Babylon 5.
This Hitchens’ piece outlines the reasons for skepticism quite well, I think.
Well, when you put it like that . . . is there any down side?
With quotes from Hichens and Hollywood scriptwriters, I think I’ll leave you to it.
Is it? At present Iran needs nothing from anybody to “give it time,” as it’s obvious military intervention is not on the table (not even on Israel’s table), and international economic sanctions are not much more likely, and not much of a threat, and getting them in place would be a very lengthy process in itself.
If all that is true, what exactly is there to negotiate with the Iranian regime? If there isn’t a stick available, the only carrot available seems to be lifting sanctions that don’t affect the upper echelon of government anyway. Ultimately, Ayatollah Khamenei doesn’t seem like someone who sees reasonable compromise as a good thing.
From Iran’s standpoint, the value of the ‘negotiations’ lies in Iran gaining a forum from which to lecture the United States, rhetorically attack Israel, and stand up to the ‘Great Satan’. The leaders of Iran have just been handed a propaganda coup. Just as the people of Iran start to question the authority of the current regime and rise up against it, the United States is going to give them the legitimacy they lack. This is not good for the Iranian people, who are clearly subjugated and under the thumb of a theocracy they do not want.
Consider this: At this moment, the U.S. it taking extreme measures to punish Honduras, because it says the Honduran government is not legitimate. At the very same time, the U.S. is now entering negotiations with a nation that just put down a popular uprising through sheer brutality, and which clearly does not have the consent of the governed.
The country the U.S. is punishing has a leader who is (was) pro-American and pro-democracy, demanding that the country re-install an anti-American socialist. The country the U.S. is now rewarding is the most virulently anti-American country on the planet and one of the most repressive regimes on the planet. Does anyone see how bizarre this is becoming?
Those of you who support forcing the Honduran government to reinstall Zelaya, why aren’t you calling for the removal of the government in Iran, which clearly rigged the last election? In what way is Iran’s government more legitimate than the current Honduran government?
Back to the negotiations. Of course, the engagement buys time. Iran may even make some minor concessions if that stretches out negotiations long enough for it to complete a nuclear weapon. Then everything goes out the window anyway.
In the meantime, engaging in negotiations with Iran has increased the risk of Israel being forced to strike Iran. As it has every right to do since Iran is clearly dedicated to Israel’s destruction. For Israel, it would be insane to allow them to attain nuclear weapons.
This nonsense about the equal rights of nations ignores the little fact that one of these nations is belligerent and repressive and does not respect the borders of others and sponsors terrorism. At this point, they have forfeit their own right to continue following an aggressive path.
Do NOT modify text within Quote tags.
[ /Moderating ]
I assumed it was just some weird typo; it doesn’t make any sense otherwise, does it?
A cursory glance fails to reveal where the IAEA said that Iran is developing nuclear weapons or is now manufacturing them. Could you point to that? If Iran is developing a bomb and is flaunting it to the world then I agree with you -they should be stopped. I was under the impression that Iran genuinely wants to acquire nuclear energy, which, in my opinion, is a right for all nations to use to generate electricity. If Iran is building a bomb, I still think we should be engaging other countries who are developing/using them. We should not single out Iran but (if they are making the bomb) should be firm with them.
I’m more than certain that State of Wyoming could launch and succeed in toppling Iran, much less than using the entire military might of the U.S. I’m convinced I’m the only U.S citizen who is not afraid of Iran attacking the United States or otherwise significantly hindering our economic, military, and scientific progress and prosperity. I’m not sure why the rest of my American comrades are so afraid of Iran. Do you guys think that the Iranians are going to land on the shores of Cape Cod with curved scimitars, genie lamps, and a gundam? I’m serious. What’s the beef? What’s the fear? God knows if America was attacked today, our bomb shelters won’t be able to accomodate more than a tiny fraction of the populace. If our fear is from other countries, then we’re woefully unprepared for the coming bedlam.
Were you asleep when Bush made his “Axis of Evil” speech? Al-Qaeda’s Sunni jihadism is evil. Iraqi secular-socialist-Arab-nationalist Ba’athism is evil. Iranian Shi’ite theocracy is evil. North Korean Communism is evil. All evil is the same.
That is the sort of “constructive engagement” that can easily backfire on an authoritarian regime: At present the Great Satan is simply this inchoate evil force to which the Iranian regime can ascribe anything it likes, but once both sides sit down at a negotiating table, they actually have to articulate specific points of difference, and then (at least in a society as relatively open as Iran’s) specific criticisms can start to emerge . . .
So? In neither case is American military intervention a realistic or desirable option. WRT Honduras, the Admin is simply doing what it can – and what practically the whole rest of the world is doing – to destablize the regime. WRT Iran, America weighing in on the side of the reformers would do their cause about as much good as a Soviet endorsement would have done Adlai Stevenson’s campaign in 1952.
:rolleyes: [whatever else you may say about him, is not an “anti-American socialist” and never was. You think that characterization automatically applies to anybody who, for whatever political or strategic reason, makes nice with Hugo Chavez?! :dubious:
But they won’t, because they can’t. Iran is a bit further away than Iraq, and has a pretty good air force, and the Iranians have learned a lesson from [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osirak]Osirak](]Zelaya,[/url) and built all their nuclear facilities in bomb-hardened underground bunkers. The Israelis can’t scratch them, nor can they even be sure of sending a bombing squadron that will get home again.
Likewise, it reveals that you were simply voicing fiction when you claimed that the IAEA had certified, said, claimed, implied, or hinted via telepathy that Iran is not making nuclear weapons. A very cursory glance, with one eye closed, will reveal all the material reasons that the IAEA has in fact said it can certify no such thing, and that such certification is being blocked by Iranian lack of cooperation.
Which, if you recall, was why I pointed out the truth, since you were trading in fiction.