I have decided to turn this week into a mailbag week. I have received some interesting emails from some folks so I am going to put one up each day. My mind and heart are just not in writing a full length commentary this week. Rest assured, however, there is going to be a non political rager, coming soon, about how some of my friends are lazy, overly self-involved pathetic douche bag leeches who can't be bothered with the "burden" of helping me out when I need it.
(Whew. I feel better already)
Anyhoo, if you can, check this out tomorrow.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007 4:00 PM
Room 125 Nolte Center for Continuing Education Minneapolis Campus
Eyewitness Iran
Journalist Reese Erlich will discuss his new book, The Iran Agenda: The Real Story of U.S. Policy and the Middle East Crisis (October, 2007), which offers an alternative view of Iran and U.S. policy toward Iran. Reese Erlich reports regularly for National Public Radio, Marketplace Radio, Latino USA, Radio Deutche Welle, Australian Broadcasting Corp. Radio, and Canadian Broadcasting Corp. Radio, and writes for the San Francisco Chronicle, the St. Petersburg Times, and the Christian Science Monitor. He has won numerous journalism awards, including the 1996 Chicago International Film Festival's Silver Hugo for investigative reporting. In June 2005, he traveled to Iran with Norman Solomon and Sean Penn. Erlich's photos accompanied Penn's five-part series about the trip that appeared in the SF Chronicle and in an A&E documentary of Penn. He made another trip to Iran last year. He will be showing photos and sharing his observations from both trips.
I wish I could go but I have school and kid duty. If anyone does go, jot down some notes and I will put them up on the blog. We have about 300-400 regular readers now and I think some of them, especially those out of towners, might want to hear how the talk went.
I am certain, as well, that over the next few months we will be talking more about Iran.
6 comments:
They are talking about Iran today on the radio here in Chicago. There is no doubt in my mind that we will attack Iran before W is out. He and VP Vader need to prove to the world that his will--or vill, in this case, will be followed with respect.
Being that we cannot undo history, what do y'all think we should do about Iran?
Good question. I think a an overall week on Iran is long overdue to fully explain what I think we should do.
In a nutshell, though, this is what I would do. I would stand up and admit all the shitty things the US has done over the years in Iran and take full responsibility for all of them. Then I would say that Iran too is at fault for several things and list them.
I would conclude with a very simple statement: if a nuclear device coming from Iran is detonated anywhere in our or Israel's interests, we are going to level their country. Otherwise, they can do whatever they want.
and by doing what they want I mean nuclear energy, not attacking with conventional weapons either. That would also be met with a giant levelling.
I’m more or less on board with your line of thinking, however there’s a major “what if” that concerns me…
What if Iran begins to wage a series of terrorist incursions (more than they already do) and minor conflicts, cold war-esq against the US and our allies’, ala when their terrorist proxies bombed Israeli interests in Argentina to show their strength and reach or what they're currently doing in Iraq? The prospect of (MAD) mutually assured destruction (not for the US so much, but say, between Iran and Israel) poses some undesirable scenarios as Iran will essentially have a nuclear security blanket giving it greater latitude with its terrorist activities.
In determining how to proceed, one must answer a couple of underlying questions.
1. Is Iran trying to build a bomb or just looking for an energy source beyond the sea of oil they live on?
2. Does Iran have good intensions toward its neighbors, our allies, and us?
3. If Iran develops a nuclear bomb and uses it, and we are forced to retaliate, could the world live with the consequences? i.e.; the ensuing worldwide economic fallout, turmoil between major powers and, of course, massive death.
I’d prefer they don’t get the bomb in the first place.
If your what if? scenario plays out, then we need to go in front of the UN and prove to them what Iran is up to...1962 Jack Kennedy style. We collect evidence, make a compelling case, and isolate them economically. We are sort of doing that now but we are still babying them. We need to be as harsh as we can possibly be without attacking.
And we need the rest of the world behind us so we have to behave.
Your questions.
1. Both. We do the same thing. We want to fight the terrorists but we also want oil. They are building a bomb because it basically protects them against regime change.
2. No. That's the government, not the people. the people love us. Everytime we act like assholes (re: Dick Cheney), they like us less and it gives more grist to the Supreme Council. I don't think they care about many of the countries in the region. They want to be a power in the region and they have had our help to make them one.
3. What choice would we have? I don't think it will come to that. The strike in Syria showed the world what is going to happen if Iran gets a bomb. It's going to be over before it starts, so your preference will be met.
This is why I yearn for more intelligent and capable leaders. There is no doubt in my mind that you and I could do a better job, diplomatically, with Iran than our current leadership. They are warping the threat, refusing to learn anything about the region, and not doing the one thing that would make us look great: Apologize for the CIA funding the coup in 1953.
Where could they go after that?
Post a Comment