So what happened to the Coalition...

Parent Cafe
21

<p>But, hey, on a far more positive note, the ranking party in congress is doing an AWESOME job on a more than a few fronts. </p>

<p>A contact of mine - lawyer who works in a senate committee office for the last 10+ years - told me they arrived in his office the very day after the elections with measuring tapes and furniture catalogs. Made him move out of his office into an office 1/3 the size of the one he’s been in - which was fine, except, they kept changing their minds about where to put him, and he said that in the six weeks since the election, he has moved three times. He hopes this time is the last. But just in case, he isn’t going to unpack ANY of his boxes. He said he has NEVER seen either party spend six entire weeks arguing about office space, and that this new majority party is a very weird breed indeed. </p>

<p>Oh, he was also a bit incensed at the lack of an agenda, total absence of a plan re Iraq, stupidity of the cargo legislation (not even every car entering the WH complex gets searched)…</p>

22

<p>Mini,</p>

<p>This is from the previous page, but if you truly believe that “the U.S. has so much to gain through rapproachment with Iran. It is, after all, the closest thing to real democracy among Muslim Middle Eastern nations. (the other thing is - I’m absolutely convinced that, in a war with Iran, the U.S. would lose - but heaven forbid!)” you are the deranged left the conservatives are always railing against.</p>

<p>Iran is a dictatorial theocracy, do not lose sight of that. All decisions go through the Mullahs and finally through the Supreme Leader Grand ?yatoll?h Seyyed ?Al? Hossayn? Kh?mene?? (coincidentally ranked the 3rd Worst dictator in the world by Parade Magazine…not the most intellectual of sources, but still a semi-legitimate source). Heck, I’ll even throw in a International source, Amnesty International.</p>

<p>“Amnesty International continues to document serious human violations including detention of human rights defenders and other prisoners of conscience, unfair trials, torture and mistreatment in detention, deaths in custody and the application of the death penalty. Iran has one of the highest number of recorded executions of any country in the world. Amnesty International is particularly concerned about the execution of children and individuals who were minors when their crimes were alleged to have taken place.”</p>

<p>In Iran there is one defacto party that issues the candidate slate during an election and approves it. So it is written into the Iranian constitution.</p>

<p>Second, lose a war with Iran? Please. A war with Iran would resemble Gulf War 1, though the possibility of higher casualties likely given the probable large scale mobilization of civilian elements and fierce nationalism of the Iranian people.</p>

23

<p>The war in Iraq was lost when no one with any leadership had the stones to question the rationale behind invading in the first place. The case was built on cherry picked evidence that turned out to be untrue. And no one planned for what we would do after we took Baghdad. We invaded a country that didn’t do anything to us on September 11, that didn’t have an Islamic fundamentalist government, and we’ve left chaos in our wake. </p>

<p>We’ve planted a deadly seed in Iraq. Even if we took the president’s statements about wanting to liberate people at face value (and I don’t), we are inextricably linked with the insurgency, which didn’t exist in Iraq until we went in there. </p>

<p>If things turn around, I’ll give full kudos to Gen. Petraeus. I’m not holding my breath. And I am praying for our soldiers, who I feel have been sorely misused by this administration.</p>

24

<p>I understand fully how Iran works - remember, I worked for the U.S. government there. I have watched them elect and then throw out politicians with very, very different social and political agendas, even under constant threat of attack, even under actual attack by an enemy, backed by the U.S. using chemical weapons, even with 200,000 heavily armed aggressive enemy troops on their borders. The range of political views expressed, and the range of social policies executed is much, much wider than in the U.S.</p>

<p>I understand that all politicians are vetted by the mullahs. In the U.S., all politicians are vetted by the political parties in 1) their ability to raise funds; and 2) their ideological commitment to the party. And as it turns out, the result is much narrower range of political orientations than there is in Iran.</p>

<p>I am no great fan of the current Iranian government, nor the mullahs, nor their human rights violations, much as I am not a fan of the torture school in Georgia, or the shipment in the 1970s of “Apollo helmets” to Iran for use with other torture equipment built by U.S. companies, and paid for with U.S. tax dollars, much of the cause behind the Iranian Revolution, achieved without the firing of a asingle shot. </p>

<p>“In Iran there is one defacto party that issues the candidate slate during an election and approves it. So it is written into the Iranian constitution.”</p>

<p>You are aware, of course, of the defeat of hundreds of politicians backed by Ahmedinejad in the most recent election. They have peacefully left office, replaced by politicians who oppose his policies. If this is one party, I’d like to see a heck of a lot more of it in the Middle East. </p>

<p>Iraq couldn’t defeat Iran with a milllion troops, chemical weapons, and the backing of the United States, at a time when Iran was much weaker than it is today. Be that as it may, the U.S. has so much to gain through rapproachment - if it willing to risk offending our host state, the Saudis.</p>

<p>“He said he has NEVER seen either party spend six entire weeks arguing about office space, and that this new majority party is a very weird breed indeed.”</p>

<p>Your friend has never seen a wholesale shift in political party control in the 10 years he has served there.</p>

25

<p>mini – interesting post (#24) In terms of a rapproachment with Iran: do you see signs that Iran is heading to a less mullah-controlled, more democratic government – a government with which one could forge a reasonable working relationship?</p>

<p>PS: how sexist of me: I always thought you were female! I’m gonna have to visualize a whole other, male, mini…</p>

26

<p>"mini – interesting post (#24) In terms of a rapproachment with Iran: do you see signs that Iran is heading to a less mullah-controlled, more democratic government – a government with which one could forge a reasonable working relationship?</p>

<p>I think they would ask the same kind of questions about the U.S. - can they yet trust a country that under both Democratic and Republican Administrations tortured their people, and then spent the next 25 years working to destabilize their government, including backing an invasion by their neighbor Iraq and encouraging them in the use of chemical weapons? Can the U.S. be trusted to form a government that doesn’t lie, cheat, and deceive its own people into trillion dollar foreign military ventures on false pretenses, “rendition” people to other countries where they are tortured, and respect international human rights?</p>

<p>Trust begins when people and nations choose to begin. When nations begin to perceive that their interests dovetail, it is amazing the things that can happen regardless of their past histories. The histories won’t be obliterated, and virtually every Iranian over age 50 - even those who are pro-U.S. - has a memory of a family member or friend or friend of friend tortured or killed by U.S. backed, U.S. trained, and/or U.S.-supervised torturers, much as Iraqis have memories dead children murdered by Bill Clinton. But the U.S. has a relationship today with Viet Nam, of far less vital strategic importance, and I think it simply a matter of political will…on both sides. It could happen, provided there is a basis of trust. But not likely to happen while 200,000 hostile troops remained parked on their borders, members of their consulate are taken hostage, and the leader of the “free world” keeps chanting about the “axis of evil”.</p>

27

<p>when Iran attacked our embassy, it was said they declared war, what is so different in our actions…</p>

28

<p>

</p>

<p>You read it right. The cornerstone of the President’s policy announcement is a surge in US military aggression against Iran and Syria. Secretary Rice today refused to answer a direct question about cross-border excursions into Iran and Syria.</p>

29

<p>They are DESPERATE for the Iranians to take the bait.</p>

30

<p>mini,</p>

<p>Well, there’s no doubt Iran has plenty reason to hate the US – but there was a time when Iranian elite was fairly pro-western/pro-US. I guess I was asking if from your pt. of view, you see the eventual return to power of people who are politically/socially/ more alligned with the US.</p>

31

<p>

</p>

<p>Yep. The additional carrier battle group, military exercises, and missle defense systems around the Gulf are the signposts of a US-led regional military posture targeted against Iran.</p>

<p>The initiatives for Iraq (relaxed de-Bathification, working with province leaders, etc.) are all targeted to increase Sunni strength in Iraq and reduce Shi’a strength.</p>

<p>That is why the President and the Secretary of State resolutely reject diplomatic overtures toward Iran. They have a clear policy of heightened sabre-rattling.</p>

<p>IMO, the US “throwing in” with Sunni governments in the region against Shi’ia goverments is a HUGE mistake. We do NOT want a dog in that hunt.</p>

32

<p>I’ve written it before, but you need to remember that moderates tried to overthrow the Shah and the U.S.controlled oligarchy, and failed; western-style liberals tried to do the same, and failed; socialists tried, and failed; communists tried, and failed; Maoist guerrillas tried and failed. All tortured, killed, or exiled. Islamicists tried - and succeeded without firing a shot. People remember…</p>

<p>There is a lot of give-and-take within Iran today. They look at the U.S. and see a one-party system. People quickly forget that, after 911, the first demonstration and outpouring of support for the American people was a huge candlelight march and vigil in the streets of Tehran, just 5 days later, and before even such a demonstration happened anywhere in the U.S. itself. But they see a one-party system - with Dems and Republicans over 40 years so closely aligned in foreign policy (and in relationships with them) to be almost indistinguishable.</p>

<p>The Iranian elite are well-established in Iran. I have friends who moved back there from the U.S. - doctors and lawyers. (I have an old college friend who does intellectual property and copyright law.) Most look forward to the next election, when (unless the U.S. invades) Ahmadinejad will be gone (it will make the religious establishment happy as well), and a new group will take power, within the confines of a country which is 99% Islamic, and most people like it that way.</p>

33

<p>And the leaders of Syria and Iran said to the leader of the US. We will try to seal our borders to Iraq but we have a problem in that they (illegals) carry counterfeit documents made on printers of your making, they speak the same language without accent, they all wear headcovering and wear a beard, not to mention of the same religious faith. </p>

<p>In other words, we cannot distinquish who are legal or illegal. Why don’t you teach us or sell us the technology to seal our border. Money is not object. Surely it is easiler to do it there (US) because they (illegals) don’t have documents, the skin color is different, they don’t wear hair covering, they don’t cross at approved crossing points, they speak a different native language and if they do speak english, they speak it with accent. The United States have better technology and motivated Border Policemen. And you have a lot of excess money to seal your border. Isn’t that correct.</p>

34

<br>

<br>

<p>Yeah, but in the US when you don’t get approved by the parties, you can still get on the ballot. Just ask Joe Lieberman. There is a HUGE difference between not getting elected because the voters didn’t vote for you and not getting elected because some council of mullahs wouldn’t allow your name to even appear on the ballot. Iran has a phony democracy.</p>

35

<p>While the nature of Iranian politics may be an interesting topic, it is largely irrelevant to US foreign policy. I don’t believe that a democratic government has ever been a rerequisite for doing business with the United States. If that were the case, I don’t believe that we would have diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia…or allow Saudi Arabia to dicate our military strategy as they are doing in regards to Iraq.</p>

36

<p>“Just ask Joe Lieberman.”</p>

<p>Yup. Let’s ask him. Vetted by the high priests of the capitalists. Take away his money, and see what happens. The range of folks and their social and political views on the ballot is much, much wider in Iran than it is in the United States, and is so, even with 200,000 aggressive enemy troops encamped on their borders. To them, we have a one-party system. </p>

<p>Meanwhile, half a million Iranians died when a vicious dictator, backed by the United States, and making use of chemical weapons approved by the United States (the “Rumsfeld handshake”) invaded from next door. They won’t get fooled again. </p>

<p>They’ve got a big stake in what happens next door - likely bigger than the U.S. there - they have to live there.</p>

37

<p>More on the U.S. hostage taking:</p>

<p><a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070112/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq[/url]”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070112/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

38

<p>No news yet on the release of the hostages. It is front page news in the Middle East, but blacked in our “free press” here.</p>

39

<p>Is a liaison office part of an embassy?</p>

40

<p>Branch office of the Iranian embassy.</p>

<p>When you can’t tell the players without a scorecard, it’s time to get your troops the hell out of there.</p>

<p>By the way, anybody notice the resounding support for Bush’s “surge” in Bahgdad? The Prime Minister (who we claim “really means it this time”) cancelled his scheduled press conference. The last time he promised additional battalions of “Iraqi military” for Bahgdad, they never showed up.</p>

<p>Gotta run. Just got Dr. Strangelove from Netflix. “There’s no fighting in the war room!”</p>