Rhetorical Wars on Iran Don’t Solve Anything

JAZZ WROTE:

This particular rib is poked in a couple of directions, concerning not only how to deal with Iran itself but how “to get Russia on board with sanctions against Iran” and is conflated with the current food fight going on over the START treaty. While it’s always a warm and fuzzy experience to summon up the ghost of Ronald Reagan, trying to compare our stance against the final years of the Soviet Union and the Russians today is rather disingenuous at best.

Reaction:

What? Reagan’s foreign policy limited only to USSR? It’s much bigger than that. There were Cuba, a Communist Germany, North Korea, rouge countries in Latin America, etc. at that time.

MR. JAZZ WROTE:

While we certainly took a hard, effective stand against the U.S.S.R. it eventually collapsed under its own bloated weight more so than from any direct offensive action on our part. That’s rather different than today’s far more compact – and in many ways resurgent – Russia and their position on the world stage.

Reaction:

Two things:

1. Reagan’s War was as tough as ours today, if not tougher.

2. You’re lying against Palin’s oped. Sarah didn’t even single out Russia as the lone partner of US on this.

3. When it comes to Russia, Palin’s oped only gave a hint that Russia is “unreliable” and could be a possible traitorous partner of US.

Exact quote from Palin’s oped:

Russia continues to support Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactors. It also continues to sell arms to Iran — despite the Obama administration’s much-touted “reset” policy with Russia.

Did Palin mention that Russia’s the only country that truly help Obama? NO. NO. NO. NO. JAZZ IS LYING.

MR JAZZ WROTE:

Saying our sanctions should be “tougher” and have “more teeth” doesn’t do any good as long as so many other key players don’t go along with them. (And we’re not just talking about Russia. It’s China, Japan, India, and South Korea to name just a few.) For an example of how well that works, just look at how efficiently we starved Castro out of Cuba.

REACTION:

From the Oped, Sarah clearly specified as indicated above that USSR and even UN are not reliable allies against the Mullahs.

I repeat, Mr. Jazz. Palin didn’t single out Russia a viable partner to this effort. Because of Obama’s Russian policy, Palin can’t even trust Russia.

Palin specifically asked for more “concerted” efforts to all allies.

MR JAZZ WROTE:

3. No matter how much we might bray about “standing with the people” of Iran against their government, it means little if you’re not actually going to invade when Iran’s leaders don’t really seem to care what we think.

Reaction:

So, you don’t know a thing about Iran then. There are many pathways to enter into Iran. There are ways to mobilize a stealth attack. You just don’t know … because you’re not a military strategist. You whine immediately without exploring the possibilities. Too unReaganesque of you!

MR. JAZZ WROTE:

But foreign policy is a popular area for critics to turn presidents into punching bags. It’s a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation. This is pointed out when Ed declares, less than a paragraph later, that Iran’s leaders have no interest in our friendship and frankly don’t care much what we say one way or the other. Without vast international support which currently is lacking, it’s still all just rhetoric.

REACTION:

So, you just copied the oped again. Sarah didn’t say that Russia is the only partner to this. The oped even hinted that Russia is a suspect.

MR. JAZZ WROTE:

In the end, Iran’s government will only “go away” via one of two routes. Either they will need to be taken down my [BY?] military incursion or the Iranian people – who frequently don’t like America much more than they like their current leaders – will take matters in their own hands and create a new government which will hopefully be easier to deal with

REACTION:

Hear! Hear! JAZZ HAS ONLY TWO IDEAS FOR FOREIGN POLICY:

(1) BOMB IRAN!

Of course, Sarah Palin and many Americans have already learned the lessons of our experiences in Iraq War … BOTH THE FINANCIAL AND POLITICAL COSTS.

(2) LEAVE IRANIANS AND LET THEM SOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS ABOUT THE NUKES AND MULLAHS!

Wow!

BEAUTIFUL, MODERN-DAY NON-FOREIGN POLICY OF JAZZ SHAW!

JAZZ ASSESSMENT OF HIS TWO OPTIONS:

the former strategy is obviously not an option for any sane politician at home, given the nation’s weary outlook on the current efforts to create new democracies at gunpoint. And the Iranian people don’t seem ready to make the leap. So in the end, Governor Palin’s “advice” to the president seems to boil down to one demand.

Reaction:

Jazz can’t pull the trigger so … he’ll just pray for the good Iranians to SOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS …. FOR US! Heh!

JAZZ’S CONCLUSION:

So in the end, Governor Palin’s “advice” to the president seems to boil down to one demand.

We must replace the failed rhetoric of Barack Obama with an entirely new flavor of failed rhetoric!

Reaction:

For Jazz, the only thing a US President can do is RHETORIC.

Jazz is exactly the same as Obama. WEAKLING!

BUT NOT PALIN’S OPED IS DIFFERENT… NOT JUST RHETORIC. IT HAS HIDDEN MASK:

I agree with the former British prime minister Tony Blair, who said recently that the West must be willing to use force “if necessary” if that is the only alternative.

Unlike Jazz, Palin can go for broke … when there’s no other options left. [And mind you .. Palin decides quickly according to the situation. Her quite unique talent, I guess.]

NOW … JAZZ’ INSULT TO PALIN:

It may tug on some sympathetic heartstrings, but it’s not much of a foreign policy.

Response:

Go to Webster Dictionary and learn the meaning of the word “policy”. Policy is a set of principles usually in form of key statements, … RHETORICS!

If you want “specific instructions”, then you are asking for a game plan or even a strategic detailed war plan that only being discussed inside the WAR ROOM!

And I repeat what Palin’s oped said:

I agree with the former British prime minister Tony Blair, who said recently that the West must be willing to use force “if necessary” if that is the only alternative.

FINAL TAKE:

1. Reagan’s cold war strategy is not just about Russia, Mr. Jazz. It includes worldwide operations, some were in Cuba, North Korea, and other key Latin American countries.

2. Reagan’s War was against Communism. Besides Reagan’s rhetorics, there were actual (some were covert) military operations not just in Europe … but around the world. Everything was monitored, studied and controlled.

3. JAZZ IS LYING AGAINST THE OPED. OPED DIDN’T SPECIFICALLY MENTION RUSSIA AS THE ONLY KEY TO PUT SANCTION VS. IRAN.

4. Besides RE-WORDING SOME OF PALIN’S POSITIONS, Jazz doesn’t offer any policy solution at all.

5. Jazz just repeated what Palin had written. Isn’t that plagiarism with intentional stealing of ideas, in some respect? Of course not. As usual…. “everybody knows it” so … not stealing per se, heh? That’s why Jazz is disputing the oped because the oped is saying what everybody already knows as general “truth” or fact about the Mullahs in Iran? Or is it hybrid case Palin Derangement Syndrome — I mean say anything that opposes Palin’s view or undermines her effort?

TheAlamos on December 22, 2010 at 11:27 AM

As this is a post about how to deal with Iran, perhaps you might care to mention Reagan’s brilliant strategy about Iran and how that worked.

audiculous on December 22, 2010 at 11:49 AM

I can give my 5 cents. But I don’t want to pretend like Jazz Shaw … that I know everything. he he he!

I believe that Pentagon has enough information and our military has enough capability to make a stealth attack against Iran’s nuke facility.

The politics in DC has always been the main distraction to craft a realistic plan.

But I also believe that the past/recent “sanctions” that have made against Iran ARE NOT REALLY SANCTIONS AT ALL. The international communities can starve that country to death if they really want to.

In the past, aids such as the Fed’s bailout through IMF to European countries/allies have always been tied to such kind of political “request”/commitment from our allies. Under Obama’s Administration, our aids to other countries have become nothing but “pure dole outs” — no political return whatsoever.

There are many ways to “stun” and “club” Iran, possibly through a combination of military actions (explicit or stealth), stringent economic sanctions, etc.

In short, the solution is this:

AN IRON PRESIDENT WITH STRONG POLITICAL WILL WHO WILL DO EVERYTHING TO END IRAN’S NUCLEAR AMBITION.

No other way, I guess.

TheAlamos on December 22, 2010 at 12:11 PM