Posts Tagged Iran
“Mom, the Government’s being paranoid again. Make it stop.”
Posted by Roy Antoun in Foreign Policy, Global Economics on May 18, 2010
The New York Times recently reported that Iran proposed a new deal with Brazil and Turkey in which the rogue state would “ship half of its nuclear fuel to Turkey.”
What’s the United States’s response? More sanctions. The New York Times continues to report that “rejecting the new deal, however, could make President Obama appear to be blocking a potential compromise.” And blocking a potential compromise he is indeed. The United States has been prodding a stick at an angry pit bull for half a century and seems to believe that doing so will make the pit bull (Iran) calm down and accept U.S. terms. What President Obama, his predecessors, and current State Department staff refuse to do, however, is put themselves in Iranian shoes.
When President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeatedly states that he is willing to negotiate and talk with the United States, perhaps the United States should be willing to negotiate and talk with the same country it has harassed for fifty years all because of an oil dispute in the 1950s. It’s as if the U.S. is doing whatever it can to prolong conflict and delay peace.
Here’s a question I would like to pose to the State Department: “Would Iran go to war or launch a nuclear missile on its biggest trader?” Obviously not if it’s trading the same fuel used to create a missile with Brazil and Turkey. Perhaps if the United States did not act so belligerent, other countries (or organizations for that matter) would not have an excuse to use or detonate a bomb in America to begin with. Iran can hardly enrich uranium to 20%. Uranium must be enriched to 90% in order for it to be used as a conventional weapon. And considering that half of Iran’s nuclear fuel is being shipped overseas, we learn that Iran only has enough fuel for just one warhead that it is decades away from producing.
The United States is playing the “Paranoid Card” again. A recent study disproved the Federal Government’s claim to have been able to intercept 84% of incoming missile targets. Realistically, our antimissile defenses have only been able to shoot down 10-20%. Not only is it quite sad that our government was off by about 70% in its own assessments, but Iran has yet to develop one missile, let alone enrich its uranium to energy-producing levels.
The U.S. likes to create problems for itself that really have never existed. This isn’t the first time and if we allow government to continue operating this way, it won’t be the last.
Map of the Problematic
Posted by Roy Antoun in Foreign Policy on February 16, 2010
More on flawed American foreign policy…
“There is something extremely problematic with the way the State Department handles its foreign policy, especially after the election of an administration that has promised us something along the lines of a “change” from the last administration. The New York Times reported today:
At a news conference in Tehran on Tuesday, reports said, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reiterated that Iran was ready to suspend enrichment if it could exchange its low-enriched uranium stockpile for processed fuel rods from abroad. But he said the swap should be “simultaneous” — a demand already dismissed by the United States and its allies.
“We are still ready for an exchange, even with America,” Mr. Ahmadinejad said, according to Reuters.
With the State Department immediately announcing a dismissal in even acknowledging Mr. Ahmadinejad’s proposal, it is no wonder why Iran’s government is distasteful towards America and her allies.
Russia, on the other hand, has been far more diplomatic:
On Tuesday, Natalya Timakova, Mr. Medvedev’s spokeswoman, said Russia’s position had not changed and the Kremlin believed Iran should have “broader and more active cooperation” with world powers on its nuclear program.
“The international community needs to be certain that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful,” she said, “but no one can rule out the use of sanctions if these obligations are not fulfilled.”
Russia, a former communist country, has adopted some of Thomas Jefferson’s basic international relations theories: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations – entangling alliances with none.” What also seems troubling is how the United States feels more threatened by Iran’s “nuclear capabilities” being an ocean away than Russia does being only a border away.”
Iran a “Military Dictatorship”?
Posted by Roy Antoun in Foreign Policy on February 15, 2010
As seen on YALiberty.org…
According to a recent New York Times article, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared the Islamic Republic of Iran to be a “military dictatorship.” She said that “we will always defend ourselves, and we will always defend our friends and allies, and we will certainly defend countries who are in the Gulf who face the greatest immediate nearby threat from Iran.” But one must question why the United States has “allies” in a war that is being fought against a non-conventional army, or why the US feels the need to intervene in the Middle East at all (if oil is the issue, all government needs to do is lower taxes and allow the private sector to compete on creating a new, renewable energy source).
Furthermore, the United States is now proposing a new United Nations Security Council Resolution “that names specific companies and the wide web of assets…to increase the cost for those who do business with Iran so much that they would cut off ties.” Not only is the United States interfering in global free markets, but it is only giving Iran another reason to hate the West. Rather than compromising with Iran, the policies our government is pursuing will strengthen hatreds which already exists and even create enemies where we had none before.

