NEWS: Iran Should Support The Insurgents

POLITICS: Iran Should Support The Insurgents

The Bush administration has been saying for quite a while now that Iran has been arming the insurgents in Iraq. The Pentagon went so far as to invite reporters for a little show and tell session during which the military displayed all the Iranian weapons they had confiscated. Last week it was reported that NATO officials caught Iranians shipping explosives to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

For a long time Iran and the Taliban were bitter enemies. Now they are working together in a policy shift that the US should know all too well: My enemy's enemy is my friend. It is an alliance that does not bode well for the US.

Bush and company are demanding Iran mind its business. This is what his lapdog, Joe Lieberman, said this weekend:

The rules? Did you submit the rules of the invasion to your enemy before you went in? I am amused at the arrogance of the Bush administration and its lapdgs that Iran should stay out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Really? Let me give you a scenario and tell me if the US should stay out of it.



Years from now, China has become the world's super power. The US economy collapsed after being over-stretched militarily and due to massive dept. China has its eyes on Mexico's oil fields, which have been dormant for years due to a lack of funding for its oil infrastructure. China invades Mexico due to some trumped up accusations about Mexico being involved in terrorism. China is also forced to invade Canada due to their massive coal deposits, oh, and also they had something to do with terrorism. So, now, our enemy China has occupying forces in the countries on our north and south border. Do we allow our enemy to do what ever the fuck they want? Do we not do anything while their army completely surrounds us, all the while talking about how we are "not following their rules" that they set up and that they could bomb us? No, we fuck with them as much as we can. We try to hurt them militarily while avoiding a direct conflict, just as Iran is and should be doing. It is an obvious defensive move.



Iran is apparently our enemy and they have every right to be involved in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It would be stupid of them not to be involved. They should be shipping every explosive and weapon they can get their hands on to insurgents in Iraq, as well as the Taliban in Afghanistan. A threatening army now stands on their east and west borders and Iran should defend itself - just as America has done by invading the two countries. You can't illegally invade another country, threaten their neighbor, then get all pissy when they get involved in your occupation. Well, you can, but you'd be the Bush administration.



What comes around goes around.

I cannot even begin to explain how idiotoc this argument is. So you're telling Iran to go kill Americans - we deserve it? Just out of curiosity where are you from? I know it is your right here in America to state your opinion and that is a great thing about the U.S.; but, does your own homeland allow you to do the same? I know Iran wouldn't.

Yes, I don't think the first thought of a leadership included in 'The Axis Of Evil' is really thinking much about disarming, particularly not after one of those countries has already been invaded unilaterally.

Shoddy logic, shoddy thinking. The US policy towards Iran is pretty silly (by which I guess I mean we should have developed some sort of policy in the last 20 years besides "Iran is bad, mmmm kay?" even if this is often true), but I don't see how it is in Iran's interest to try and become a belligerent in the current combat.

Shi'a majority Iraq is likely to play ball with them quite nicely, even if Arabs hate Persians and vice versa, as soon as we leave, and Afghanistan, or at least the western half, is and will always be in Iran's economic sphere. Brinksmanship with the Bush White House seems like a rather dim move on Iran's part . . . if the actions described actually are being carried out by the central government, and not some ideologically over-zealous elements within the government.

And, more personally, I think suggesting Iran should help people try to kill me and the people I serve with is pretty fucked up.

I cannot even begin to explain how idiotoc this argument is.

That's not his argument. Although he's framed his contention for maximum offense (it's FTR, that's what he does), his basic assertion is just that's obviously in Iran's legitimate self-interest to take action when a hostile is destabilizing states on two of its borders.

This is one of the problems with international relations, is that the pursuit of self-interest can lead to conflict.

I think he's also additionally making the point that Iran's interest in Iraq is legitimate, our own was not. While his is certainly true, this is also by this point irrelevant.

Well, sorta. If Iran were a person I would totally agree with you. Iran isn't an ethnic group, tribe, or even nationless state, it's a highly developed state that has been involved in international politics at a complicated level for years. True it works for their favor that America is the invader after having recieved aid from the former Soviet Union and our politically meddling in the past. The truth is that Iran was at war with Iraq in the 80's. There are pictures of Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand. Its not about Islam, Persian/Arab tensions, globalization, unilaterral action, or even America's arrogance. It's about power and money. We can go back to the Greek ancient civilizations about this, but most recently it was between Iraq and Iran. The U.S., like everyone told them would happen, has created a huge power vacuum in the region. Don't forget that Iran imports more oil than it produces. It's cool to slam the U.S. politicians and military brass, but not the U.S. and common soldier; but if you do slam the U.S. as a country don't falsely prop up other countries who's mullahs and elected officials are playing the same game.
As for China, well hopefully by the time they become the number one country in the world they will have created a large enough middle class to form unions. These unions will be good for a long while, then become corrupt, and through global demand jobs will flow over seas. If the U.S. is so impoverished prehaps we could steal their scientiests and skilled workers and become a "rogue" state 1776 style!

P.S. I wish the Republicans put up a valid candidate here in CT. so we wouldn't have to be embarassed by Joe Lieberman anymore. Lamont would have taken it.

As someone who has spilt coffee in the corridors of power, I can say that global politics boils down to a simple premise. If you're not screwing another country over, they're either screwing you over or getting screwed by someone else for you. It truly is a dog eat dog world. All governments are bent and two faced, some are just better at covering it up than others.

The pussy, dicks, arsehole speech in TEAM AMERICA is funny because it's true...

Well, you can do that, but then you have to deal with the consequences of getting assfucked by a military superpower. Having power pretty much means you get to make the rules. Not having power means you have to abide by them.

Of course, it sucks that it goes down like that, but thems the breaks with the situation as it exists now

You should totally give up this comedy journalism thing and get into bad SciFi.

A guy in a faraway land says "Stop that." Yeah, that'll work. Especially when that faraway land has an invasion force or two sitting next door. Peace really is a time to prepare for war when you think your way of life is under threat.

----------------------------------------
America, Fuck Yeah (from Team America: World Police)

America...
America...
America, FUCK YEAH!
Coming again, to save the mother fucking day yeah,
America, FUCK YEAH!
Freedom is the only way yeah,
Terrorist your game is through cause now you have to answer too,
America, FUCK YEAH!
So lick my butt, and suck on my balls,
America, FUCK YEAH!
What you going to do when we come for you now,
it's the dream that we all share; it's the hope for tomorrow

FUCK YEAH!

McDonalds, FUCK YEAH!
Wal-Mart, FUCK YEAH!
The Gap, FUCK YEAH!
Baseball, FUCK YEAH!
NFL, FUCK, YEAH!
Rock and roll, FUCK YEAH!
The Internet, FUCK YEAH!
Slavery, FUCK YEAH!

FUCK YEAH!

Starbucks, FUCK YEAH!
Disney world, FUCK YEAH!
Porno, FUCK YEAH!
Valium, FUCK YEAH!
Reeboks, FUCK YEAH!
Fake Tits, FUCK YEAH!
Sushi, FUCK YEAH!
Taco Bell, FUCK YEAH!
Rodeos, FUCK YEAH!
Bed bath and beyond (Fuck yeah, Fuck yeah)

Liberty, FUCK YEAH!
White Slips, FUCK YEAH!
The Alamo, FUCK YEAH!
Band-aids, FUCK YEAH!
Las Vegas, FUCK YEAH!
Christmas, FUCK YEAH!
Immigrants, FUCK YEAH!
Popeye, FUCK YEAH!
Democrats, FUCK YEAH!
Republicans (republicans)
(fuck yeah, fuck yeah)
Sportsmanship
Books

Lyrics by Trey Parker

Aren't we the ones that are arming both sides?

And then there's this.

...

Yeah, I was struck by the total absence of any necessity for that, as well.

excess, fuck yeah!

Excess, FUCK YEAH!

Double Posting, FUCK YEAH!

Repetition, FUCK YEAH!

I wouldn't take the comment so literately. America's foreign policy is stuck in a huge world of gray (dark, dark gray) and while Iran or Syria is not innocent (not by a long shot), we've got a lot of blood on our hands. Yes, killing Americans is wrong, but is it any less wrong than bombing Iraqi civilians?

I think at this point, concerned Americans would best serve themselves if they look at themselves as a citizen of humanity before a American citizen (not that I'm disavowing my citizenship or anything, but it comes in #2 in this case). We can't bomb, invade and occupy a country as we have without making it's neighbors nervous. Action/re-action.

Did you read this part?

That sounds exactly like something we (Americans) would do (ding, ding... history!!).

To be honest, that's just a nice right-wing way to say, "I don't like what you just said, asshole!"

mmmm, the turning of your misinterpretation of his general assertion into a personal attack on you.


this neighbourhood looks familiar....

This is true. Anti American sentiment in Iran (and elsewhere) was unheard of before George W Bush. Also, the administration's policies are clearly motivated by ignorance and hate, and not by any terrorist, 9/11 style attacks

That's disingenuous.

You're trying, and failing, to implicitly establish a correlative claim that this administration's demonstrably unnecessary blunders in the region haven't negatively impacted the way America is perceived there. In fact, the United States was formerly viewed quite positively by the average Iranian (to be distinguished from the hard-liners and true-believers, who were and remain disproportionately powerful in the Iranian government).

After Iraq, and Bush's continual chest-thumping and sophomoric attempts to "isolate" Iran, this is very much no longer the case.

Similar trends have been occurring throughout the region generally, and with good reason.

FTR, you should probably take your dumbshit journalist ass over to iraq and write a good followup to this article from there.
What you wrote is extremely offensive, considering all the young american troops dying there all the time. I wish Iran would could make some more profit by dealing your ass into the underground sex slave trade.

I just said that, oyaji.

I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.