* Leaders and thinkers of numerous countries accuse Iran of harmful actions and ambitions. They expect Iran to use its soon to be improved relations and income to increase harm. This is sad, inasmuch as Iran might have been our friend, but for factors outside its control.
* The Cold War forced us to vie with the Soviets for allies and resources around the world. This competition corrupted numerous former colonies, and it caused us to subvert the 1953 election of a nationalist leader in Iran (by fomenting a riot), giving power to the Shah, who squandered his position and abused his subjects, and provided us cheap oil. Therefore, we were justifiably targeted by the Islamic Revolution. Their detention of our embassy personnel gave us the misanthropic Reagan revolution led now by Rush Limbaugh, so Iranians should feel adequately avenged.
* Having punished us that much, Iran might wish to reconcile with us when it ascends to a dominant position in the middle east. It might have done so already were it not for the inflammatory effect of Palestinian suffering. We may find ourselves cooperating willy-nilly in combating ISIS.
* Iran’s populace is almost homogeneous with respect to ethnicity and religion. Consequently it will probably endure as a sovereign nation with stable borders and with submissive and/or supportive populace far into the future. The rulers and populace belong to each other, unlike Syria, Iraq, Israel, Emirates, etc. Moreover, its populace is educated, industrious and western leaning, unlike many of its near and distant neighbors. Therefore, Iran should eventually be the most prosperous, stable, secure, disciplined and happy nation in the middle east.
* Most of Iran’s conflicts are elective, in support of its endangered friends. Iran shouldn’t fear invasion or theft by neighbors except as provoked by its belligerence, but it does fear attack by various Sunni or Jewish neighbors. That fear would be less if they were our friend.
* With respect to our dispute with Iran, qui bono? I've been wondering about this for some time.
* The Cold War forced us to vie with the Soviets for allies and resources around the world. This competition corrupted numerous former colonies, and it caused us to subvert the 1953 election of a nationalist leader in Iran (by fomenting a riot), giving power to the Shah, who squandered his position and abused his subjects, and provided us cheap oil. Therefore, we were justifiably targeted by the Islamic Revolution. Their detention of our embassy personnel gave us the misanthropic Reagan revolution led now by Rush Limbaugh, so Iranians should feel adequately avenged.
* Having punished us that much, Iran might wish to reconcile with us when it ascends to a dominant position in the middle east. It might have done so already were it not for the inflammatory effect of Palestinian suffering. We may find ourselves cooperating willy-nilly in combating ISIS.
* Iran’s populace is almost homogeneous with respect to ethnicity and religion. Consequently it will probably endure as a sovereign nation with stable borders and with submissive and/or supportive populace far into the future. The rulers and populace belong to each other, unlike Syria, Iraq, Israel, Emirates, etc. Moreover, its populace is educated, industrious and western leaning, unlike many of its near and distant neighbors. Therefore, Iran should eventually be the most prosperous, stable, secure, disciplined and happy nation in the middle east.
* Most of Iran’s conflicts are elective, in support of its endangered friends. Iran shouldn’t fear invasion or theft by neighbors except as provoked by its belligerence, but it does fear attack by various Sunni or Jewish neighbors. That fear would be less if they were our friend.
* With respect to our dispute with Iran, qui bono? I've been wondering about this for some time.
No comments:
Post a Comment