--- Davd Brin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I never said that. What I said (and it's proved) is > that the Iranian PEOPLE would love to be at peace > with us. And all we have to do is for Bush to land > in Tehran and apologize. > > One apology and the mullahs would be out on their > ears. We'd have doughty friends, and the Saudi > @[EMAIL PROTECTED] sheiks would be shaking in their sandals.
I find your confidence in this matter to be...odd. You rant about President Bush's encouragement of a rebellion against Saddam Hussein and failure to support them in 1991. The actual facts of the extent of his encouragement (very minor) don't really square with your descriptions, but so what? Here, you _want_ us to do the same thing - urge these people rebel against a brutal, tyrannical government, but not actually invade and overthrow the government (which is what is actually _necessary_ to overthrow a modern government willing to use force to stay in power, as the Iranian government surely is). Other than your belief that it is so, and contrary to all evidence of the extent to which the Iranian government is willing to use quite ruthless methods to maintain its position on power, what _evidence_ supports your position that it would be so easy to topple the Iranian government? And what, exactly distinguishes this position from President Bush's in 1991? I have studied political science informally for my entire life, and formally for 5 years, with another 5 coming up. If I was as certain about _anything_ in foreign policy as you are about _everything_, Dr. Brin, I'd be...a really poor political scientist. The first lesson taught to _very serious student of politics is that we are limited in what we know and what we can predict. Basic causality is often impossible to determine, even in retrospect. I can, for example, lay out multiple equally-convincing and explanations for the First World War, only the most important event of the 20th century. If, _even in retrospect_ it is impossible to determine something as basic as "why did the countries of Europe fight this massive conflict" I find your certainty about the _future_ impact of hypothetical actions implausible, at best. A very incomplete list of the problems with your belief would be: 1. What if the government didn't _want_ to give up power and used its secret police to preserve its position - what then? 2. If it were so easy to overthrow the Iranian government, why hasn't the (popular) opposition done it already? 3. Why do you think that an apology by the US is the most important thing in the world for Iranians? What evidence we have suggests that the average Iranian _already has_ a very favorable opinion of the US, and (in fact) might even have supported the invasion of Iraq (Saddam Hussein was not beloved in Iran). What plausible reason is there that an apology from the President (for what, exactly?) would somehow cause these people, who presumably have other concerns in their lives, to overthrow their government? ===== Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Freedom is not free" http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
