Check out this piece by John Bolton, former ambassador to the United Nations, on Iran. An excerpt:

“It has long been clear that, absent regime change in Tehran, peaceful means will never persuade or prevent Iran from reaching its nuclear objective, to which it is perilously close.”

Is this guy actually advocating a war with the Iranian state? Hasn’t the neoconservative movement, an offshoot of Trotskyism, learned its lesson from the failure in Iraq?

Also, why would we expect Iran to do anything less than pursue nuclear weapons? Quite a few of its neighbors have “the bomb”, and nuclear deterrent obviously works (just ask the Libyans and the North Koreans). Isn’t this obvious?

We are at peace with China, Russia, and a whole host of other states with nuclear weapons. It is absurd to argue that we can’t have peace with a nuclear Iran as well.

2 thoughts on “Wow

  1. I oppose war, but the government of Iran promotes mass demonstrations crying “death to America,” and they may well mean it. Can we have peace with those whose main goal is to murder us? At least the USA should apologize to the Persian people for overthrowing the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953. Americans should also call the country Persia rather than the Nazi-influenced 1935 change of country name to Aryan, i.e. Iran.
    Fred Foldvary

    • I don’t know if Iran’s goal is to murder us. Sure, they talk about it, but their military and clandestine operations are incapable of harming the U.S. republic. Iran’s military apparatus is, like many other despotic states (I have been reading waaaay too much Montesquieu), designed to prevent coups and protect its peripheries, rather than invade and occupy other states. There is certainly no capability for long-range or even medium-range missile strikes.

      I think that Tehran’s goal is to simply survive, and despotic regimes usually rely on boogiemen to justify their heavy-handed tactics against their people. A major convenience Washington supplies to Tehran is the military and economic cooperation it gives to Arabs despots, as well as militarily occupying neighboring states.

      I did not know that the National Socialist German Worker’s Party influenced the name change from Persia to Iran. Was this because the Persian regime was close to Berlin, or because the Persian regime looked to Berlin as a model for development and modernization? Or was it due to Berlin’s anti-Semitism?

Please keep it civil

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s