Martin;
You’re the one who doesn’t ‘get it’.
Here’s a concept you won’t be able to get your mind around;
The Revolution currently happening in Iran wouldn’t be possible but for George W Bush going into Iraq.
It was that act of ousting Saddam, which started this desire for democracy on the part of the people in the middle east, in Iraq certainly… but now Iran, as well. Do not make the mistake of thinking the two situations so isolated from each other. Being neighboring countries with less than well-protected borders, news of what’s changed for the better in Iraq has doubtless started filtering across the border, person to person.
Consider the changing and rather ironic dynamics here.
For all the animosity built up on the Iran- Iraq war and before, the degree of social isolation in Iraq because of Saddam, was actually a boon… a protectant against the influence of the rest of the world, from the point of view of the Iranian regime. Similarly, Afghanistan, run as it was by the thugs, also provided Iran with Isolation they couldn’t have purchased with any price of arms or money.
That’s important for this reason: Have you ever seen a dictatorship where isolation from free people wasn’t part of the mixture that made it possible? That isolation is increasingly disappearing.
I’ve suggested in the past that this was part of the reason for going into Iraq in the first place; to start that ball rolling. The momentum of history has changed as a result of that act of Bush in Iraq. It has spread to Iran, now, and best the Iranian regime can hope for is to delay it for a while, regardless of how this situation works out in the shorter term. The genie is out of the bottle, now.
Word about what is possible under a greater degree of individual freedom is hardly information that will be passed between the Iran Iraq and Afghanistan that existed as little as a decade ago. It can now, though, and we see the result. Islamic Extremeism is no longer flousihing, there.
Pakistan, now finds itself in a fight for it’s life with the extremists, but it does seem one they’ll win. Syria, is now isolated from other extremist states,Hamas driven by Syria and ruling Lebenon until recently through Hamas has been removed form power in Lebenon and so Syria will be increasingly unable to aid the cause of the extremists in any significant way. Eventually the pressure there will build to the point where it has in Iran, and freedom will take root there, as well. You think this a failure? I don’t.
Meanwhile, Obama won’t speak up, even denying moral support to the freedom seekers in Iran.
I’d call THAT a failed presidency, but then again, that’s me And about 70% of the rest of the country too. If you don’t understand any of that, may I suggest you address your questions to WSB’s morning man?
David Levavi:
Again, no argument. I think, though, you misread MY intent. Notice that in both the case of JFK and the case of Reagan, we didn’t go to war. Indeed, other than speaking out, not much else was required in those cases; speaking up for liberty was enough. Speaking the truth is enough. Moral support if you will.
Obama can’t bring himself to do that even in the defesnse of liberty. Understand, I’m not holding JFK up as an icon by any means, though I’m sure some of my readers, here will… Martin for example leaps to mind. But that I hold him as low as I do, furthers, not lessens my point… even he knew what was what, enough to speak the truth. Obama doesn’t.
