12 Comments

I think Bolton jumped the gun to begin with, he should have realized the US was not going to just go belly up for the mullahs.

I think the idea was to satisfy the critics who say we have not tried.

I also think that people are making too much of sitting up some low level diplomatic relations. I would not be surprised in fact if the Iranians themselves think this is all about spying on them. They are paranoid after all.

The price of oil went south when word come out that talks began. In the last 24 hours they started back up again on news that Iran is stonewalling.

Both Jalili and Rice seem to be merely enacting the Kabuki of diplo negotiating. Jalili is, of course, playing for time. He will gas on about Islamic culture, the Islamic soul, the Prophet, the Mahdi, etc., etc. Rice is trying to show we’re tough customers (yeah, right!), and to follow up she says we tried, that’s it. Wait a bit, and watch for the announcement of our participation in the next round, and the next, and the next. There will be nothing quick about these chit-chats. And no results. Our State Department’s appetite for appeasement is compulsive and endless — at least until residents of the Iranian test range, Tel Aviv, awake one morning to ultimate unpleasantness. One can only hope that the Israelis don’t find themselves as expendable as our State Department does.

Alex is right, State has proven to be toothless with respect to Iran, and the Iranians will continue to stall with whatever nonsensical gibberish they can think of, but their time is running out. Look for the rhetoric to heat up on both sides sometime in late summer/early fall, with an increase in incidents involving – heretofore under-reported – Iranian Revolutionary Guard speedboats harassing our ships, testing and provoking us. The naval blog Information Dissemination is a good resource for a perspective the MSM is unwilling and far too incompetent to report on. The Navy has kept quiet about most of this to allow the obvious charade of “diplomacy” to play out.

Mostly though, it is Israel that will act. They cannot trust Obama to “have their back” if he is elected, and they certainly can’t afford to let Iran perfect their nukes. As with Iraq in the 80’s, and Syria just recently, they will set the Iranians back at least five years out of self-preservation. Everybody will howl about it for awhile, but most states, particularly Middle Eastern ones that aren’t Iranian puppets, will privately heave profound sighs of relief.

Of course the State Department is a toothless tiger. That’s its job. They’re the “good cop”.

The Burns trip could possibly be construed as a demonstration to our allies that the current process is at a dead end. This depends upon what was said prior to the meeting. If there were indications to the Iranians that this was something of a last chance or the Iranians hinted that they were ready to deal then the event was of some portent.

I would like to think that the trip was just to give us an excuse, in the event of an attack (either with our active participation or offering logistical support to Israel) on Iran. It’s just inconceivable to me that it would be for the sake of “talk.” Wouldn’t be surprised if we have special ops troops on their side of the border doing serious recon.

Maybe the Iranians are just waiting for Barry to show up as president. He and this guy might get along real well. They can both make speeches on their favorite subjects, i.e. themselves, and then stare off in the distance at some unreachable goal.

Lightnin’ : “Mostly though, it is Israel that will act.”
Yes, I agree that they will, they know all too well what’s at stake. What worries me, however, is whether, all alone, they have the hardware and manpower to destroy all the deep underground facilities that Iran has built. Also, the Iranians have parcelled out development facilities in numerous locations the better to disperse and protect the various bits and pieces of the program from detection, and destruction. The IAF have the courage and the skill, no question; I just am not sure that they have the numbers of planes for the many, many runs required, or perhaps even the types of bombs to get at the deep underground facilities. The Jerusalem Post has been reporting an unusually high volume of consultations between senior US and Israeli military both in Israel and Washington. It’s just not possible to know what this portends about the level of US involvement. Also, for what it’s worth, Total, the French mega oil/gas company, has decided NOT to go ahead with their investment deal for development of the Pars field in Iran, at this time…..

Will these obvious preparations finally wake the mullahs up and convince them to make a deal? I just don’t think we’re dealing with people susceptible to reason. They are at the nexus of some very difficult and powerful imperatives: their demographics are in the process of doing them in, their economy is almost in a state of hyper-inflation and getting ready to go down the tubes, corruption seems to be the main business of government, and then there’s the whole apocalyptic Mahdi ideology which is a living reality (alright, alternate reality, why should the West have the corner on the delusion market!) for large numbers of those in control of the government and country.

So, what are their choices? Wait for the oil to run out, wait for the economy to explode and face more and more internal unrest, wait for the demographic bomb to finish their chances? I think they see their nuclear bomb program as their one chance to survive and thrive again, for with it they will be able to call the tune not only in the region (and gain control of all the oil), but also in the West which needs that oil for its economies to function. Ironically, theirs is an imperialistic solution. The European Union’s foreign policy expert, Javier Solana, has been wearing a track in the Persian carpets in Tehran for low these last six (?) years offering ever more appeasement goodies, only to be rebuffed once he’s finished his tea. Add to this the sorry performance of our State Department in dealing with Kim and North Korea, and Ahmadinejad has every reason to conclude that once he gets nuclear weapons, he can write his own ticket with the West. In their desperate straits, I don’t think they will ever give up nuclear weapons development.

The question of whether, once they have nuclear weapons, they would make good on their constant threats and declarations and actually launch those weapons at Israel is the most important question of all. The last time a world leader and his ruling class were so infused with anti-semitic hate everybody sat on their hands and did nothing, or worse. Are we going to sit patiently and say nothing now, while the amnesiac fools who seem still to make up our governing elites chatter, appease, and do nothing? Time is running out.
Dick:
Barry will, for sure, be staring off into the distance at some delusional goal. Ahmadinejad will have already reached his all too real goal — he’ll have his nukes in his hip pocket by then.

Alex,

It is not necessary to destroy all of Iran’s capabilities. The very act carries the message that enough is enough and the next time we will make very, very sure.

Regards,
Roy

I am not so sure Israel will act.

Roy: “It is not necessary to destroy all of Iran’s capabilities. The very act carries the message that enough is enough and the next time we will make very, very sure.”

Roy,
I’m not sure about this. I can’t help but think of what happened with Saddam in Iraq with Desert Storm — we didn’t finish the job, left him in place, yet he didn’t get the message, and we know the rest. The mullahgiac (a word? now it is. sounds rather like a medical condition…..) regime in Iran is in a much more desperate situation to begin with than Saddam ever was. If we leave them with some capabilities (and here I take you to mean nuclear facilities? – i.e., we don’t have to destroy all of the nuclear facilities), I think they will only begin again with renewed determination — simply because they see it as their only way out of their various dilemmas.

Is this the only possible outcome? Of course not. The actual course of events could take any one of a gazillion different branchings, depending, in part, upon what strategic targets were hit. The Iranian economy would likely crash (sadly harming the people, not the regime), or ideally the regime might fall (maybe….but the guys with the guns tend to win, especially since, in Iran, they are not at all hesitant about using them, brutally), their neighbors might invade (but does Iraq or Saudi Arabia really want such an all out adventure? Hardly. Israel surely would not.), and then there’s Hizbollah and Hamas, who, were they to get their hands on any shards of the nuclear capabilities left over in Iran, would not hesitate to use them for maximum destruction.

And on, and on. In the best of all possible, enlightened worlds, we would not have to contemplate such a dreadful array of choices and possible outcomes. Perhaps we’re closer to that happy condition than can be ascertained from current events. Perhaps Mr. Solana’s persistence will be rewarded. Perhaps the mullahs will see the light, have a change of heart, give up their quest for nukes, and go for peace. From my lips to her ear…..

If Israel acts she will face the united rath, of the world community and she can’t bank on either party in the U.S to back her up to the hilt. Everyone seems to be betting that Israel will do the dirty work for the West but the current Israel administration is so weak that it can’t be relied on, especially if they think they will be hung out to dry. The talking game will never work because Iran has no intention of droping the nuclear proram, no matter what is in the goodie bag for them. We are in such mass denial about their intentions. Iran is going to join the nuclear club and the west is going to allow it to happen. People get ready, there is a’ change a coming. Or duck and cover if you prefer.

FOX News Channel makes a serious effort to be fair and balanced and has many liberal reporters and producers.

That might be a bias for providing some balance vs. the bias of the elite news media for providing NO balance.