BushAmerica's insane antagonism toward Iran and its developing democracy requires that we be against any economic and diplomatic progress in the entire SW asia/ME region. Good luck with that.
Can you see why the rest of the world now sees us aa a troublemaker and principally a force for instability and violence? Not to mention the enormous opportunity cost of not having tried to come to a grand bargain with the resource-rich Islamic Republic of Iran ourselves?
Deadeye Dick, Master Statesman extraordinare. He'll have quite a historic reputation, indeed---I think Talleyrand is safe.....now, bring in the cookies and tea, Condi. And don't forget "your husband's" beer this time! You know he needs his morning "pick me up".
Posted by euzoius at October 24, 2007 08:01 AMBut Steve. These guys are the grownups. Don't you remember?
They really cleaned things up after those hippies in the Clinton administration gave us our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity.
Posted by Mister Go at October 24, 2007 08:23 AMWhat developing democracy do they have in Iran? I'm against attacking Iran but you need to be realistic about how that country is run.
Posted by JohnT at October 24, 2007 08:24 AMJohnT, what developing democracy do they have in Pakistan?
Posted by Steve Soto at October 24, 2007 08:33 AMCan you see why the rest of the world now sees us aa a troublemaker and principally a force for instability and violence?
With a Democratic congress unwilling to stop the bleeding.
Posted by Seven of Six at October 24, 2007 08:44 AMJohnT..what kind of democracy do we have in the United States? We are no better off that the theocratic dictatorship in Iran or the military dictatorship in Pakistan, except we have them rolled into one theocratic military dictatorship.
Posted by T2 at October 24, 2007 08:55 AMJohnT, Ahmadinejad was freely and fairly elected president by the citizens of Iran, and they had a choice of candidates, a clear "left" and "right". Further, there are municipal and regional elections with a choice of candidates.
Yes, the clerics have the final say on many things. Yes, they don't permit everyone and anyone to run for office. Yes, the opposition in Iran's parliament calls for boycotts and sometimes resigns. I didn't say it's a perfect democracy (like ours, ha-ha). But it's clearly developing, and clearly has the features of a hybrid, evolving democracy. It should be permitted to evolve, it's their country, their national destiny.
Who are WE to be endlessly carping about the political evolution of other countries, especially ones that already have democractic elements and pose no realistic threat to us?
Posted by euzoius at October 24, 2007 09:23 AMIran might not pose a threat to us but that bastion of pinko commie oppression Cuba sure does. Unlike the bastion of just plain old dirt poor oppression nearby in Haiti. No threat there, that's for sure. It gets so complicated. Democracy. No democracy. Oppression. No oppression. Threat. No threat. Maybe we should just stop playing world cop?
Posted by snark at October 24, 2007 09:33 AM"...a multitude of countries...build economic and energy relationships that would only isolate us should we attack Iran."
Praise the Lord and pass the insulation.
Posted by Pvt. Keepout at October 24, 2007 10:07 AMHa, our Democracy quickly moving away... towards, Ten Steps to Fascism.
It's a little clip worth seeing, even the Brownshirts will enjoy it.
Steve I'm not sure what your comment means. Are you saying Pakistan is like Iran and is run by a group of religious nuts.
Posted by JohnT at October 24, 2007 10:44 AMI read in the LAT this weekend that India has finally given the U.S. offer of nyukular technology a "thanks but no thanks" because India would rather preserve good relations with its neighbors and not look like it's getting too cozy with Amurika. One could see this coming, but I will miss the mangos we were promised in the deal. (:>
Posted by Donald Cormac at October 24, 2007 11:40 AMWhat is Iran's finance minister or rough equivalent doing in Washington D.C., aside from negotiating deals with the Indians?
Also, as bad off as we are, we're still more democratic than either Iran or Pakistan. We were outraged in 2000 with the Supreme Court decision on Gore and the recount, but imagine if the Court decided ahead of time which democrats were acceptable and which were not. That's Iran.
Posted by Brian Bell at October 24, 2007 01:00 PM...but imagine if the Court decided ahead of time...
Some would argue that the economic elite in this country decide ahead of time which candidates are acceptable or not.
Posted by snark at October 24, 2007 01:30 PMJohnT, neither Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, nor Saudi Arabia are democracies, yet we treat all of them differently.
Posted by Steve Soto at October 24, 2007 02:22 PMThe pipeline from Iran to India cannot happen until Pakistan is stabilized which is several years away. The terrorist will surely blow such a pipeline going across Pakistan. By the way the relationship between Iran and India is many ceturies old and has nothing to do with India showing finger to Bush administration.
Posted by suresh at October 24, 2007 02:52 PMtest
Posted by GK at October 24, 2007 03:08 PMIndia is one of the most pro-US countries in the world.
India is also the most pro-Bush country in the world.
Try again, lefties.
Posted by GK at October 24, 2007 03:11 PMGK, there obviously is a reason why you don't post around here much. Both of your links are at least 18 months old, and neither takes into account the ascension of the Congress Party in the last election.
Keep trying.
Posted by Steve Soto at October 24, 2007 04:21 PM'takes into account the ascension of the Congress Party in the last election.'
So what? That changes nothing, and certainly not something major like India's heavy pro-US stance.
Much like how the 2006 elections in the US did not lead to an end to the Iraq War, Patriot Act, etc.
Why are you so bothered that India may actually be pro-US? It is logical, given how many decades they suffered from leftism-induced poverty and socialism.
'takes into account the ascension of the Congress Party in the last election.'
So what? I doubt you actually know anything about Indian politics. That event certainly does not change something major like India's heavy pro-US stance, which itself is built upon decades of historical events.
Much like how the 2006 elections in the US did not lead to an end to the Iraq War, Patriot Act, etc.
Why are you so bothered that India may actually be pro-US? It is logical, given how many decades they suffered from leftism-induced poverty and socialism.
Oh, for Christ's sake. This is all smoke and mirrors, people.
Those pipelines were planned years ago. The wars were only convenient cash-making distractions to enable the construction of pipelines. Afghanistan was just the first. All of Bush and Cheney's oil buddies will still make out big time in this.
Life is just going on as usual. We get lied to, rooked into sacrificing OUR kids for THEIR wars, and screwed out of OUR hard-earned taxes to pay for all of it.
Posted by TLV at October 24, 2007 04:41 PMConsider this, too http://www.samsonblinded.org/news/muslim-world/pakistan
Posted by Nikol at October 28, 2007 05:16 PM