Home to Roost
Hoo-boy. Even Iran’s mullahs are using the “chickenhawk fallacy“:
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) – Iran’s supreme leader said Monday he would put on military fatigues and fight to the death if his country were attacked – unlike U.S. “warmongers” who he said cower in the rear far from the front lines.
President Bush has said The United States is not preparing to attack Iran, but no option is ruled out if Tehran does not abandon what Washington views as efforts to build a nuclear bomb. Iran insists its nuclear program is only to generate electricity.
In an apparent bid to boost morale in the face of U.S. pressure over the nuclear program, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei mocked Washington in a TV speech, saying its leaders keep to the rear in any confrontation.
“We are not warmongers like U.S. leaders. They are warmongers. They are after war, but we are men of sacrifice,” Khamenei told a crowd of several thousand in the northeast city of Mashhad.
This, from a guy whose country has been waging a proxy war against Israel for 25 years. What, too afraid to take on 6 million Jews on your own?
I’m going to assume Khamenei distinguished himself in combat during the Iran-Iraq war. He had ample opportunity for eight years.
“…but we are men of sacrifice.”
Yep. I seem to recall that’s one reason Iranian casualties ran so high during that war: suicidal charges against the Iraqi lines. Oddly, Khamenei does not seem to have led any, so I assume he was referring to the sacrifice of others.
Didn’t Saddam Hussein volunteer to fight a duel with Bush?
Funny how these things are circular.
The chickenhawk argument should never, never, never be used by anyone who’s had anything good to say about suicide bombers.
Not only israel, but… was he on the frontlines when Iran and Iraq had
their war? was he “gassed”?
Gassed by Iraqi WMD’s?
Are “men of sacrifice” anything like “invincible tribal warriors” and “battle-hardened elite troops”?
If so, then the Iranian regime ought to distintegrate so fast that there’ll be no one with authority to surrender.