If he's a sheep herder, I will eat my woolen sweater...

Underestimating the Enemy...

Did anyone see 60 minutes last night.
It was something to see.
It was the first time I’ve seen Mike Wallace at a loss for words.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran oftentimes referred to as a lunatic gave his first
Interview to the media in perhaps six months or more.
He was charming in his fanatical way and he changed my opinion.
Originally, I thought he was some ignorant sheep farmer; someone who did
Not have a global outlook or an understanding of what was going on outside his country.
I was wrong on both counts.
Admittedly, his perspective is not my perspective, but make no mistake about it,
Anybody who can shut Mike Wallace up make him look at a loss for words requires a second look.
What I discovered was that this is a man who is woefully underrated.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in short no dummy.
He doesn’t get his words piped in over a digital system.
He doesn’t sound like he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
And he very clever and very slippery to boot. Plus, on top of that he has a PhD.
What’s more, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said a lot of relevant things even though I don’t agree with most of his arguments. What he does say happens to resonate with Islamic elements for the most part. What he did question was why Bush was always talking in war-like rhetoric; why doesn’t he engage in questioning in the pursuit of peace.
Wallace did pin him on Israel saying that if you are really for peace, why are you talking about destroying Israel. He then engaged in an answer that was something like twenty minutes forcing Mike to suggest to him that he needed to keep his answers short? And wondered why he couldn’t do that?
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad suggested that it was a complicated question.
There is no doubt in my mind that if he had it within his power, he would eliminate not only Israel but the US as well.
The problem here is the American attitude which says if you’re not on my team, I’m not going to negotiate with you which, to this author, seems backwards since where diplomacy is required is with those who don’t agree with you so it seems we are caught between a rock and a hard place. We cannot exert diplomacy with Iran because they do not agree with us; yet because they do not agree with us is precisely why we need diplomacy.
The bigger point that we seem to fail to see is that Iran is a complex state that depends on free elections. There are more people of influence than the prime minister. Without representation, without dialogue, we are dependent on the hard work of others. However, with our bellicose attitude and our willingness to talk brute force with everyone, we have lost a good deal of the leverage that we may have at one time exerted in the world.
It is in this climate that we must take on the head of a country of 75 million people rich with oil money and intent upon getting nuclear energy. It has become a very dangerous world and we continue to underestimate the opposition believing that we can get our way through tactics deemed corrosive to the rest of the world.
In the end, it is we who is predictable facing a complex opponent who would love to see us wiggle on the line for as long as he can and we are more vulnerable than we imagine.

Might it not be the irony of ironies that while so many progressive and liberals point to Israel’s excesses in the war against Hezbollah, that the future was decided because Israel held back?
Les Aaron,
The Hubmaster

We are beginning to see proof of that coming out of Iran.

Iran is now seeming to bask in reflected glory as a result of Hezbollah’s survival and the good account they gave of themselves.

Israel had it wrong. They thought would be easy to eliminate Hezbolah.
It wasn’t.
And now Iran has become emboldened….emboldened enough to do two things:
Conduct tests of its weaponry—mainly its large missiles

And to announce to the world that it would proceed with the development of its nuclear capacity. Even the leading cleric seemed complicit by promising a “sweet reward.”

Iran is sending definite offensive signals and the rest of the world is standing on the sidelines seemingly unsure of what to do.

This sends out bad signals. It assures Iran that he world will do nothing no matter what it does…

At this point, the US may find that the biggest crisis it faces is not Iraq but Iran.
Iran is three times larger in terms of population and perhaps double or triple the size of Iraq.

I don’t see anything happening now aside from aggressive deliberation and diplomacy that will change the outcome: War.

Bush is now between a rock and a hard place: No troops and a potential war on his hands.

Where do we go from here?

It’s totally bizarre but this one is starting to spiral out of control. And the Iranians see the US as weak and vulnerable.

Les Aaron