Iran Doesn't Want War and is in fact Extending an Olive Branch!

[excuse not to write]

Last edited Fri Mar 16, 2012, 05:17 PM - Edit history (1)

From ABC News:

A high-level advisor to Iran's supreme leader said his country is ready to allow "permanent human monitoring" of its nuclear program in exchange for Western cooperation but also warned Iran is prepared to defend itself against military strikes.

Mohammad Javad Larijani, who serves as Secretary-General of Iran's Human Rights Council and key foreign policy advisor to Ayatollah Khamenei, said the West should sell Iran 20 percent enriched uranium and provide all the help that nuclear nations are supposed to provide to countries building civilian nuclear power plants. He also said the U.S. and the West should accept his country's right to continue what Iran calls its peaceful nuclear program. In return for cooperation from the West, he said, Iran would offer "full transparency."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/iran-official-offers-human-monitoring-nuclear-sites/story?id=15930677#.T2OTbPVW2Sr

Now, I'm sure the Bill Kristol-John Bolton-Charles Krauthammer-Liz Cheney et al Idiocracy will poo-poo this, but I don't think the Iranians want war, and I'll bet that the overwhelming majority of people on DU feel the same, namely, that Iran does not want a war.



(Edited to remove ALLCAPS from headline)

[tabatha]

1. And neither does Obama.

[excuse not to write]

6. Correct

[The Magistrate]

2. Advisor To A Leader Does Not Cut It, Sir: Khamenei Himself Must Speak, Publicly

And the speech must include invitation for immediate dispatch of inspectors, without any pre-condition for their admission and full access.

[excuse not to write]

9. That's not how it works

Countries extend feelers, float trial balloons. We should respond positively to this statement, and then maybe we'll get a response from someone more senior.

[The Magistrate]

10. It Is The Only way This Will, Sir

If the man wants the thing to settle down, he is going to have to do something dramatic to change the terms of the narrative.

[excuse not to write]

11. Excuse me?????

It's not Khameini beating the war drums! If anyone needs to "settle down", it Netanyahu!

[The Magistrate]

13. He Needs To Rally Opposition To An Attack On Iran In the West, Sir

Oblique and subtle moves will no do this. He needs to make it crystal clear, blindingly obvious, that Iran has no interest in construction a nuclear weapon, and no hostile intentions towards any other country, Israel in particular.

If he wanted to end the danger to his country tomorrow, he could do worse than declare recognition of Israel as a state and legitimate government of its territory, and propose an exchange of ambassadors after signing of a treaty of peace and non-aggression.

[excuse not to write]

14. Okay, I understand now

Israel First. Silly me, I was thinking about America.

[The Magistrate]

16. You Understand Nothing, Sir, And Demonstrate That With Such Low-Grade Snark As The Above

The reasons that the Iranian possession of a nuclear weapon is widely viewed as destabilizing are in descending order, its government's great hostility to Israel, its government's hostile relation to the Saudis, including some ambition to evict them as custodians of Mecca, and to foster secession of Shia regions of Arabia, and finally, its government's general hostility to the United States, which a nuclear weapon would lend a certain immunity to. All of this is conditioned by a wide-spread feeling that people who play up the desirability of martyrdom cannot be wholly trusted to hold up their end of 'mutually assured destruction' scheme of deterrence; despite numerous attempts to portray the Iranian religious leadership as wholly rational actors, and the reasonable presumption anyone will avoid suicidal actions, the thing does not wholly 'sell' to many.

It is these things the Iranian government must address if it wishes to press a program of nuclear development, and if it does not address these to the satisfaction of all global and regional powers, sooner or later, for better or worse, it will find itself under serious military assault.

[excuse not to write]

19. Do you have a son or daughter currently serving in the military?

If not, then kindly remove yourself from this thread.

[The Magistrate]

20. You Made A Funny, Sir, And From Page Three Of the Manual, If Recollection Serves

When you have something to say about the analysis of the actual situation, kindly present it.

My personal view is that a military strike against Iran by the United States, or Israel, is a very poor course of action, that would prove counter-productive, and be very destructive to U. S. interests, both in the region and globally. But such a thing nears even so, and will continue to threaten so long as the situation remains what it is, without genuine change on the part of the religious regime in Iran. Either it alters its regional policies, or it forgoes any nuclear development, and convincingly in either case, or it will come under attack.

[excuse not to write]

21. Didn't think so

Consider your neocon ass on Ignore. Buh-bye!

[The Magistrate]

22. Somehow, Sir, The Strength To Bear Up Under That Will Be Found....

"I should like to take you seriously, but doing so would insult your intelligence."

[eridani]

27. So what's wrong with being immune to the United States?

We're the imperial bullies here. Iran is one of the few states in the region that have no history of aggressive warfare. The last time any state in the area attacked anyone (Russia in 1828), they were soundly clobbered. Its only real offense is not being under indirect military rule by the US.

OMFG! They're threatening the military bases we have them surrounded with!

[The Magistrate]

30. The Government Of The United States, Ma'am, Takes a Dim View Of It

Others may well have a different opinion in the matter.

But it is the view of the U.S. government that can be backed with military force, and therefore its view has more weight than most in this.

Obviously, if there were not hostile relations between the governments in other areas, this question of a nuclear program would be of little moment. No one is too concerned about the likelihood, for example, that Argentina or Brazil or Japan could manage to produce a nuclear weapon in fairly short order should their governments decide to do so.

[eridani]

31. True. It's pretty clear that our government doesn't give a damn about--

--the enormous costs that maintaining a military empire has on imposes on the people it's supposed to be "defending."

[Fozzledick]

33. How do you do, Sir, have we met?

I must say, I do like the cut of your jib!

It's been said that the mark of a good lawyer is the ability to argue either side of any case.

[The Magistrate]

34. We Crossed Words On A Narrower Question, Sir

Namely, whether there is a genuine need for military action in the next six or eight months, or if Netanyahu is engaged in political manipulation, and possibly intent on distorting the electoral politics of the United States by his actions, in order to secure a regime here more to his liking, that would regard excesses of Likud policy 'between the river and the sea' with equanimity. To hold there is no need for any military action within that time frame, and that Netanyahu is indeed engaged in political manipulation, hardly contradicts any elements of my description of the overall situation here.

[Fozzledick]

36. Your points are well taken, Sir.

While I'm sure we'll continue to find myriad details to argue over, I found it refreshing to see us in such close agreement on the fundamental nature of the Iranian situation.

For what it's worth, I can't help noticing that the more credible estimates of Iran obtaining offensive nuclear capabilities have recently shrunk from years to months, and I see Netanyahu's political manipulations as directed toward securing Obama's support for the inevitable necessities before Iran crosses Israel's red lines, but it seems unlikely that we'll agree on those points.

What concerns me more is the issue of whether Supreme Leader Khameini is indeed crazy enough to launch a first strike despite the certainty of overwhelming retaliation. Some have suggested that his repeated musings on the destruction of Israel are just posturing and bluster, but I find his rabid consistency indicative of a sincere obsession.

The central question as I see it therefore is: Is Khameini less insane than George W. Bush (who launched a hopeless crusade in Iraq against the "demonic forces of Gog and Magog&quot ? Given his personal character and past behavior, I find it unrealistically optimistic to answer in the negative.

Besides which, I just don't trust the bastard.

[Hugabear]

17. So we should just ignore Iran's overtures because they're not doing it the way you want?

Bomb bomb away, because they didn't say the magic word!

[The Magistrate]

18. So Long as They Make Them In An Ignorable Manner, Sir, Their Overtures Will Be Ignored

My preferences are immaterial to my analysis of what a situation may require....

[gratuitous]

3. Well, until they're willing to hand over our oil

We'll just keep sending more military hardware and personnel into the region. Sure hope nothing bad happens while they're massed in the Gulf, because we might just have to start blowing stuff up, and that would be a shame. Because we don't want war. Nosiree. Not us. Peaceful as the day is long, that's the U.S.

[KG]

7. +

[indepat]

12. Nosiree. Certainly not if Iran jumps though the requisite hoops without

misstep or hesitation. One would think that Iran, having already had its government overthown since WWII for the temerity of threatening big oil, had previously been taught a good lesson, that a word to the wise is suffient.

[Vincardog]

4. WE had a deal with N. Korea where their Nukes were buried in concrete with video cameras on the spot

24/7 in exchange for food aid.
Dim Son cut of the food aid.
N. Korea resumed their development.
Iran is offering us the same type of deal.

[hifiguy]

5. Just saw that over on Sully.

Verrry eenteresting, as Arte Johnson used to say.

If I were POTUS I would have some back-channel diplomats asking some serious questions about the feasibility of making this happen. Anyone speaking for Khamenei has the authority to back it up. Of course it wouldn't satisfy Netanyahoo, but what would?

[leveymg]

8. All the actual threats of attack I've ever heard have been from "us" (Israel & US) toward them.

The Iranian leadership are neither insane nor suicidal. They know we require little pretext for war, and will make them up, if we think that's required to get our way. The threats from "us" have similarly been quite calculated.

[11 Bravo]

15. The day Liz Cheney dons a uniform and places her worthless ass in harm's way is the day ...

that I drag my tired old butt down to a recruiting office to see if they will let a 61 year old combat vet saddle up one last time.
(But since Cheney has the 5 deferment chickenhawk gene firmly embedded in her character, I won't be holding my breath.)

[bvar22]

23. The Stratergic Situation in Iran:

Can you hear The Drums?
I can.
Same old tune.

[font size=4 color=firebrick]
If you're not FOR the WAR in Vietnam Afghanistan Iraq Libya IRAN,
you're WITH The Communists AlQaeda The Terrorists Saddam Qaddafi The Ayatollahs!!![/font]

[excuse not to write]

25. Oh Dear God the Revolutionary Guard is Practically in Hawaii and Alaska!

Excellent graphic, btw.

[Mosby]

24. They have agreed to this before - only to change their minds

Iran Agrees to Send Enriched Uranium to Russia

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/world/middleeast/02nuke.html?pagewanted=all


Russia Regrets Iran's Refusal of UN Nuclear Deal

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Russia-Regrets-Irans-Refusal-of-UN-Nuclear-Deal-82404812.html

[Riftaxe]

26. Peace for our Time!

...

[eridani]

32. Most of us are citizens of the country that is the major threat to peace in our time n/t

[felix_numinous]

28. Iran is not suicidal

-despite myths to the contrary. War mongers want their land for resources, position and for control. The game is so transparent.

[sarcasmo]

29. Warmongers like McCain want war, the rest of us are smarter than McCain.

[DCBob]

40. If McCain/Dingbat were in charge we would have bombed them long ago.

which would have triggered a ME crisis and restarted the cold war with Russia and the price of oil would be about $200.

[sarcasmo]

42. 10 dollars a gallon.

[excuse not to write]

35. Kick before Flight

I'm taking a redeye to Washington. (State, that is: I'm no power player!

Seeya later if the damn thing doesn't crash. (Not a big fan of flying.)

[BlueIris]

37. War with Iran is suicide. nt

[Prometheus Bound]

38. Fuck the warmongers!

For they are the scum of the earth.

[DCBob]

39. I think this could be legit and worthy of being taken seriously.

Even if its not, just the appearance of a "negotiation" will very likely settle the oil markets and bring the price of oil down.

[WinkyDink]

41. So? Neither did Saddam Hussein.