Good Reasons For Talks With Iran And Syria

Jules and some others seem skeptical of potential talks with Iran and Syria. I've heard some other hawks are, as well. I'm a hawk, but I still think it makes sense for some very specific reasons.

Anyone care to guess whether anything good will come of this? If it leads to serious talks, if there are any agreements, what they will be worth?

Think of the news we've been reading lately and put it all into context. Ahmadinejad is getting pressure at home from reformers and hardliners for the economic toll he is putting on Iran. If the US remains firm with no engagement at all, it undercuts opposition to Ahmadinejad, implying the only way out for Iran is either war, or total surrender to the West. It also makes it easier for the Iranian president to cast us as the villains to his population.

We are also trying to get tougher sanctions with the required help of Russia and China. In a sense, this throws them a bone and may even be part of a larger negotiation. Putting aside any thought of war, the best way to deal with Iran is to increase economic pressure on them. If we can achieve that, we may be able to crumble the worst of that regime without firing a shot, or risking additional lives.

We still have our carriers deployed and lately the news has been speculating about Israel's readiness to strike at Iran's nuclear facilities - and do it with the cooperation of some Arab states. It isn't like there isn't a stick being poked in Iran's face.

Like many, my emotion and patriotism say no, Iran is assisting in attacking our troops and should pay the price. But then, I'm not the one guy who has to make the call to put even more of our young men and women in harm's way. Were I that guy, I would want to be damned sure I had first exhausted every possible opportunity to bring about change through peaceful means.

Add in the facts that our military is stretched, mostly due to cutbacks during the Clinton years - though we can still resort to military confrontation if it absolutely comes down to it, and Bush is making the smart, prudent play. Even if hawkish pundits like me don't especially like it, it's a move that makes sense given where things are today.

Going to war is easy, but as we've learned from Iraq, getting out isn't always a slam dunk.

Comments

[scarshapedstar]

"Add in the facts that our military is stretched, mostly due to cutbacks during the Clinton years"

Really? I thought it was because we invaded Iraq.

Why'd we do that, anyhow? Shouldn't we have gone straight into Iran from Afghanistan? It's not like Saddam was going to stop us.

[Phoenix]

"It also makes it easier for the Iranian president to cast us as the villains to his population."

He's already done this. Agreeing to talks just makes him look stronger and makes his people think he's been right all along with his threats and postures. Screw that.

If we do agree to talks, it will only be to let the world know that we 'tried' before we give Israel the green light. In the old days we wouldn't have had to put up with this PC crap to fight wars.

A little chat and a cup of tea and suddenly we are no longer The Great Satan? I don't think so. Ahmadinejad can't win. Without talks, he's toast with more sanctions; with talks and the 'forced' turnaround he'll have to put on for the world will make him look like a wimp. That'll work in a hot little corner in hell.

[Hard Right]

That's it scar, don't let's facts or reality intrude on your delusions.
When W came into office he had a military suffering from 56 billion in shortages-courtesy of Clinton.

Besides, the only ones worried about a U.S. military invasion of Iran are the loony leftists. Israel will most likely nuke Iran off the face of the planet. Problem solved.

[Kite]

I'm in a mixed feeling type of mode regarding talks with Syria and Iran. A part of me says "Those Persians and Syrians cant be trusted!The Quran instructs them to lie if it is for their God...how do you trust people like that?" But then again...the other part of me says "Perhaps we can't just paint Ahmadenijad as the bad guy but the entire mullah collective? Make the people turn against the Ayatollah and such."

I mean...Islam essentially destroyed the Syrian and Persian empire and brought two flourishing countries from cultural bliss to excrutiating poverty. Maybe after 1400 years of a self-destructing belief system the people might want to return to the proud people they once were.

[Zifnab]

"When W came into office he had a military suffering from 56 billion in shortages-courtesy of Clinton."

Clearly, the shortfall could not have been that bad, cause I remember a $1.4 trillion tax cut Bush put on the table.

Oops. Stoopid facts.

[Hard Right]

Zifnab, how old are you? The military and its BUDGET was severely cut under Clinton. After years of trying to make do, Bush increased the military funding in an effort to make up for the extreme shortage of equipment, capabilities, and man power. The money had always been available, Clinton and the Dems refused to give it. Simple as that...or you.

[Zifnab]

"After years of trying to make do, Bush increased the military funding in an effort to make up for the extreme shortage of equipment, capabilities, and man power."

Really? Cause I didn't see that anywhere in his budget. If I remember correctly, his budget involved tax cuts. Also, more tax cuts. But if you can show where Bush increased military spending before 9/11, I'd love to see it.

[seekeronos]

http://www.axcessnews.com/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=13089

Looks like those talks may very well happen.

I'm not so sure that those nations can be trusted either... but here are some other points to consider:

(Iran)
- Has an increasingly unpopular President (who we shall call, "Mr. A."...) who has seemingly mismanaged things to where some economic issues - like the availability of gasoline - is starting to affect the everyday life of Iranians. While Mr. A. espouses the same views and talking points as the clerics, he might run afoul of them by trying to gran too much at one time politically.

- People still largely support the nuclearization (for civil uses... rrrright!) of the nation, but some younger Iranians may well not be as moved by the call to Jihad and to the Islami(st) Revolution of thier fathers. In fact, a reasonably large number of middle-class Iranians seem to enjoy a higher than average standard of living as compared to some of their neighbors. A major war with the USA would destabilize these lifestyles rather nastily.

- The whole anti-Israel thing... not good. The clerics, the extremist nutjobs, and Mr. A. seem to have a real bent about it; Yusuf Q. Persian probably is not particularly worried about nuking Israel, so long as he can pay the rent.

- The (Iranian) Army could also serve as a counterweight to both the clerics and Mr. A (who in reality, is pretty much a meat puppet operated by the clerics).

Conclusions: Iran may replace Mr. A. with someone in the vein of Khatami or Rafsanjani (neither of whom are particularly nice folks who wish Israel well either, but are more willing to play diplomacy like a Kissinger than a John Bolton).

(Syria)
- Hard to say, but Bashar al-Assad seems to be quite a creepy guy in his own right (before we even get into al-Taqqiua lies and deception). Definitely he has the standard issue Islamist antipathy toward Israel, and has had his paws in supplying Hamas and Hezbollah jihadists.

I don't think this guy will be really willing to help anyone other than himself.

[Andrew]

"an increasingly unpopular President (who we shall call, "Mr. A."...) who has seemingly mismanaged things" - Sounds like Ahmadinejad and Bush have a lot in common!

[Hard Right]

Really? Cause I didn't see that anywhere in his budget. If I remember correctly, his budget involved tax cuts. Also, more tax cuts. But if you can show where Bush increased military spending before 9/11, I'd love to see it.

Good lord. Zifnab, the...military budget...was increased. The military... started...with a shortfall...of equipment...capability...and man power...of 56 BILLION.
Was that slow enough for you? I did not say he increased it's budget BEFORE 9/11. I said it had been increased after Bush came into office. So if he made the increase after 9/11, it's AFTER he was elected! As for the overall budget, so what if he cut taxes? The money for the military was there before the cuts. If you want proof of the increase-try Google.

[Zifnab]

"I said it had been increased after Bush came into office. So if he made the increase after 9/11, it's AFTER he was elected!"

It's after we were attacked. Might as well compare Clinton to FDR. No shit he increased the military budget AFTER 9/11. He pretty much had to, because Clinton never factored fighting a two-front land war in Asia into his military expenses. Clinton banked on reading things like "Bin Laden Determined to Strike America" and doing shit about it before he was ankle deep in rubble.

[scarshapedstar]

The funny thing about Bush's no-shit increase in the budget after /starting a war/ is that he didn't bother to pay for it. Just stuck it on my tab. Thanks, I guess.

[Rachel]

why is it that all anti-Bushies are nothing more than snarky commentators with no cogent criticism or ideas??? I've never voted for the man nor supported the Iraq war (before the "wonderful" Dems gave him the green light Oc 11, 2002), but the consistently arrogance of the anti-Bushies ( as well as their lack of solutions and maturity to deal with the consequences) put me in the W camp.
If W. has to kick this down the road, it's our own fault. We expect wars to be neat, quick and tidy and no consequences. Even if the was erroneous, isn't it our responsiblity to solve it for *the Iraqis* sake?

[joanna]

Iam so sad to watch the news and see that the Iraqie people are killing each other. Why can't kurds.syatis and sunie band together. Let each tribe pick their on represatative and bring all the people togegher.... Please quit killing each other strife or peacefull solution, but make darn sure that an other tyran likeSaddam hussien does not get in ower again. pleas be kind to your wifes and chidren they need for you to survive and need to take care of them but that can onle happen in a democrated country. My son -in-law is Syrian and I love him so much. We would all like to visit you country, but we are to scared to come. don't let religion stand in you way to be good neighbors

Warm regards,

Anneke