I’ve always liked Joe Conanson’s style. He just systematically breaks down the screaming wingnuts rhetoric in a cool and collected voice but without so much wonkiness that you want to drill a hole in your head to keep from falling asleep.
So go read his thing in Salon on Bush’s Bluster (if you can’t tell by now- I am a Salon junkie and have been for 6 or 7 years).
The bulk of evidence indicates that Iran is far from obtaining enough nuclear fuel to build a bomb, despite much alarmism from right-wing advocates of violent “regime
change.” But just as the threat of military action persuaded Saddam Hussein to
admit the United Nations weapons inspectors whose work might have prevented war, the possibility of force could induce the mullahs to meet the West in productive
negotiations.
I should add him to my list of hot brains ( with Greg Palast still at the
top).
top).
In an article in the Time magazine, the conclusion was that western powers should be putting as much pressure as possible on Iran regarding the bomb without actual military strikes, with are both ineffective and unpopular. Ultimately, the hope is that the political situation in Iran changes and the bomb won’t be pursued there. Makes sense to me.
Cause threats to bomb the fuck out of people have worked so well in the past. Didn’t work to remove Saddam, didin’t work to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, etc.
Besides- as far as Time magazine goes I don’t consider it the be all of political theory.Its a bit like thinking USA today is a good newspaper.Its mildly entertaining stories for people who don’t read.
I am a Dillettante and obviosly can’t compete with you on political theories. I don’t even know if Time is pro-left, pro-right or just pop-culture.
Common sense tells me that people do and will worry when they are threatened. This applies to both Iranians and Americans. I do agree that the treat to bomb may not be the best political move. What’s your proposal, though?
Diplomacy. I’ve said before that what Iran is trying to (and North Korea) is negotiate from a position of strength. Diplomacy goes a lot further in trying to figure out their ultimate end game than starting another war.
Military, economic and other threats are part of diplomacy. Could you be a little more specific, perhaps?
Go read http://mondediplo.com/2005/11/02iran?var_recherche=Safdari+