Make Friends with Iran

[GreNME]

I have no beef with the people of Iran.

Precisely. Which is why attempting to set up diplomatic relations for some access to those folks would work to our advantage.

 

[Ziggurat]

You mean those same 'mullahs' that have been telling the Ayatollah to stop repressing the people and actually start allowing more freedom?

Yes, the mullahs are not a homogeneous group. But consider Rafsanjani, for example. He's in opposition to the Supreme Ayatollah (there are lots of ayatollahs) right now. But while what he wants might be more tolerant and permissive than what Khamenei wants, it isn't what I would consider compatible with western democracy. He's an authoritarian (though not totalitarian), and his version of Islam is still pretty damned strict by our standards. And if he were in charge, tensions might be much less than they are now, he might not pursue nuclear weapons, and who knows, he might even scale back support for Hezbollah. But what he views as Iran's interests would still be at odds with ours.

I'm not condoning their theocracy, and I'm not condoning their international alliances, but these people are still humans and can be reasoned with.

I'm not saying they can't be (though I think the usefulness of this is, under present conditions, rather limited). We reasoned with the Soviets. It's possible to reason with one's enemies, but one should do so while recognizing that enmity. If one tries to treat one's enemies as friends, or tries to make friends with an enemy who cannot be made into a friend, it will bite one on the rear.

 

[Ziggurat]

Let's just break with our support of Israel and see what happens. Just think how much money and American lives it will save.

Where's the harm?

Where's the gain? Seriously, what do you think would happen? The world will sing Kumbayah? Muslims will stop fighting other muslims? Al Qaeda will give up their dream of a global Caliphate? Are you even aware of what it is that bin Laden first complained about? Hint: it wasn't American support for Israel.

Appeasing jew-hating killers has a bad track record. Unless, of course, you're into the whole jew hatred stuff. Oh...

 

[GreNME]

Yes, the mullahs are not a homogeneous group. But consider Rafsanjani, for example. He's in opposition to the Supreme Ayatollah (there are lots of ayatollahs) right now. But while what he wants might be more tolerant and permissive than what Khamenei wants, it isn't what I would consider compatible with western democracy. He's an authoritarian (though not totalitarian), and his version of Islam is still pretty damned strict by our standards. And if he were in charge, tensions might be much less than they are now, he might not pursue nuclear weapons, and who knows, he might even scale back support for Hezbollah. But what he views as Iran's interests would still be at odds with ours.

You're absolutely correct that Rafsanjani isn't exactly a step from Khamenei's radicalism to liberal democracy, but demanding that he be is a false hope: no nation changes that radically over such a short amount of time. It didn't become like it is now due to the 1979 revolution-- that change was years in the making, very nearly a decade of undercurrent that grew in the Ayatollahs' favor. The same is going to happen in the other direction. Rafsanjani, Mousavi, and many other reform leaders over there (both religious and political) still aren't going to be the ones to bring peace to the Middle East, but at least they want to start looking in that direction, and that we can work with.

However, the interests of Iran sans the current leadership are going to be as at odds with ours as Saudi Arabia's are, yet we seem to get on fine with that nation. Saudi Arabia is every bit as authoritarian as Iran is now-- possibly even more-- and again we get along rather swimmingly with the Saudi government despite these things.

To be frank: who would you rather the US have to deal with-- Khamenei or Rafsanjani?

I'm not saying they can't be (though I think the usefulness of this is, under present conditions, rather limited). We reasoned with the Soviets. It's possible to reason with one's enemies, but one should do so while recognizing that enmity. If one tries to treat one's enemies as friends, or tries to make friends with an enemy who cannot be made into a friend, it will bite one on the rear.

You mean like the Taliban? Or maybe like the Lebanese government? Or Egypt? Pakistan? China?

Sorry, but I'm not buying the black-and-white justification for why diplomacy won't work.

ETA: don't bother with MagZ, Ziggurat. We both could practically make up the content of his posts for him.

 

[Ziggurat]

You mean like the Taliban?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this. Are you asking if we can or should bargain with the Taliban? We have tried, it always failed, there are no prospects for success in the future. Perhaps you mean to suggest that our past attempts to be friendly with the Taliban have bitten us in the rear, in which case I'd agree, though it's worth noting that the Taliban are not synonymous with the mujahedin that we supported against the USSR.

Or maybe like the Lebanese government? Or Egypt? Pakistan? China?

China is the closest example we've had to making an enemy into a friend by means other than war. But we've been able to do it because there was enough overlap between their interests and ours. In particular, they desperately needed economic expansion, we had the markets they could sell to, and they had the cheap labor we wanted. I see no prospects for a similar realignment of interests with Iran as long as the mullahs are in charge.

Sorry, but I'm not buying the black-and-white justification for why diplomacy won't work.

That's because that's not the argument I'm trying to make. Diplomacy often worked with the USSR. But it worked when we stood up to them, made demands of them, and backed up our demands with force (economic and/or military). It didn't work because we tried to be friends with them. Can we use diplomacy with Iran? Quite possibly. Can we make friends with them? Not as long as they have a Supreme Ayatollah in charge.

ETA: don't bother with MagZ, Ziggurat. We both could practically make up the content of his posts for him.

That became clear quite some time ago when I found out what his screen name stood for. I don't reply to him for his benefit.

 

[GreNME]

The Taliban bit is easy: we're currently developing allegiances with several segments of the Taliban, and have been for at least two or three years, in the effort to get them on the Afghani side to stabilize the government. It's not as simple as measuring it by asking whether "the Taliban" are communicating or not, because the answer is "some are, some aren't." The Lebanese and Egyptian government thing goes back a while, I know, but again what was done is an accord that allowed access and commerce, not exactly a friendship that we could say worked or didn't work without plenty of caveats. With regard to Pakistan, it's just as easily able to define our relationship with Pakistan one where each side takes as many of the benefits as possible from the other, while mostly discarding the rest diplomatically, and it's been this way through at least two violent regime changes over a few decades. As far as my mentioning China goes, the reason there is because Iran is even further along the "ripe market" scale than China was in the 1960's/70's, with a huge segment of Iran's consumer base not only open to Western product but actually eager for more access to Western product. The nation already has a pseudo-capitalist economy, but is stymied by restrictions of availability of product. Providing cheap and accessible product has been a hallmark of many Western economies, and having relations with Iran would offer two main benefits (one for us, one for them): 1) it opens up an export destination for financial gain, and 2) it promotes the existence of a middle-class, which works in favor of the Iranian people while undermining the authoritarian regime.

I already pointed out that the OP's suggestion that we should "make friends with" Iran is flawed, but That doesn't discount diplomatic overtures and opening some markets as being advantageous. That's the black-and-white thing that I'm pointing out with your rejection, because it doesn't have to be "make friends with" or stay the same as things are now. There are several levels of relationships in-between the two that we haven't even bothered to consider for decades, and they could prove more effective than all of the bluster that's been tossed about for the last ten-plus years between us. Keep in mind that China wasn't exactly friendly with the US for the first 10-15 years following Nixon's summit, and even now it would be unwise to consider the relations amicable outside of the shared capitalistic aspects, but it's gone a long way toward undermining China's otherwise overwhelming control over its population's control over access to the world outside the nation's borders.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I'd like to visit my old house and neighbors again.

 

[doobiedoright]

Yes make friends with Iran and the entire Islamic world. Do this and the war with AQ will come to a end. American foreign policy is driven by the Jews. Iran knows this, Bin Laden knows this, all the countries in the world know this.

Dump Israel.

We have been hated my the ME for over 200 years.
I am pretty sure Israel is less than 100 years old......care to explain this ?

 

[MaGZ]

Where's the gain? Seriously, what do you think would happen? The world will sing Kumbayah? Muslims will stop fighting other muslims? Al Qaeda will give up their dream of a global Caliphate? Are you even aware of what it is that bin Laden first complained about? Hint: it wasn't American support for Israel.

Appeasing jew-hating killers has a bad track record. Unless, of course, you're into the whole jew hatred stuff. Oh...

Come clean

You care only about Israel and not Muslims killing Muslims.

Global Caliphate? Save that scare nonsense for the Christians.

The end of America's support for Israel is near. Deal with it.

 

[MaGZ]

We have been hated my the ME for over 200 years.
I am pretty sure Israel is less than 100 years old......care to explain this ?

Are you referring to the pirates in Tripoli? (200 years?)

Israel is the reason for Muslim/Arab hatred of America. That is the reason we were attacked on 9/11.

It is clear to everyone over there we favor only Israel at the expense of the Palestinians. It is a joke to suggest America could ever be a broker for peace in the Middle East.

 

[Ziggurat]

Come clean

You care only about Israel and not Muslims killing Muslims.

Come clean. You only want to see Jews get killed.

Global Caliphate? Save that scare nonsense for the Christians.

Oh, I didn't say Al Qaeda will achieve one. But damned straight that's what they want. They talk about it all the time, quite openly. It's not a scare tactic to recognize what your enemy keeps telling you they want.

The end of America's support for Israel is near. Deal with it.

You never answered my question. What do you think is going to happen, assuming we do exactly what you want us to do in regards to Israel? How does your fantasy scenario play out? Don't be coy.

 

[Ziggurat]

Israel is the reason for Muslim/Arab hatred of America. That is the reason we were attacked on 9/11.

Not according to bin Laden. He was much more upset about the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia. Who were there because of Saddam Hussein. We were protecting one group of Arab muslims against another group of Arab muslims, and that got Osama's panties in a bunch.

Your ignorance is simply staggering.

 

[Polaris]

Where's the gain? Seriously, what do you think would happen? The world will sing Kumbayah? Muslims will stop fighting other muslims? Al Qaeda will give up their dream of a global Caliphate? Are you even aware of what it is that bin Laden first complained about? Hint: it wasn't American support for Israel.

Appeasing jew-hating killers has a bad track record. Unless, of course, you're into the whole jew hatred stuff. Oh...

You're wasting your time. The fascist crackpot can't hear you over the sound of himself punching the clown to mental images of mushroom clouds over Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa.

 

[Ziggurat]

The fascist crackpot can't hear you over the sound of himself punching the clown

I was going to jokingly ask if that was a euphemism and then I realized, yes, actually it is, and that's exactly how you meant it.

Oh, and you're right.