Monday, 12 February 2007

Drama over Iran: Ahmadinejad counters Bush

There is ample buzz over Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's interview with ABC News (about time for the US media to do something like this). He basically says that Iran is not the evil demon killing people in Iraq, and that, for peace's sake, the US should leave Iraq. It goes without saying I strongly dislike Ahmadinejad — his ideology, cavalier actions, amazingly off-target beliefs, etc. — but there is no reason Iran would want an instable Iraq, for the same reasons China does not want North Korea to messily collapse.

In an exclusive interview with ABC's Diane Sawyer, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad refused to address accusations that his country was supplying weapons to insurgents in Iraq, saying instead that Iran asked for peace and was against conflict of any kind.

Ahmadinejad skirted questions about weapons smuggling and stressed instead that the key to establishing peace in Iraq was for Americans, and all other foreigners, to leave.
Read the interview in its entirety here.

On the American political front...
For a long time now, Bush admininstration officials have been promising reporters proof that the Iranian government is supplying deadly weaponry to Iraqi militants.

The administration finally unveiled its case this weekend, first in coordinated and anonymous leaks to a trusting New York Times reporter, then in an extraordinarily secretive military briefing at which no one would speak on the record, journalists weren't allowed to photograph the so-called evidence, and nothing even remotely like proof of direct Iranian government involvement was presented.

The result: The White House got the headlines it wanted.
And before you know it, the White House will be attacking the media for criticizing the Bush administration's poor actions. Remember: the mainstream American media was extremely hawkish in the lead up to the Iraq war, even The New York Times (thanks to the irresponsible reporting of one Judith Miller). In addition, after 9/11 criticism of the White House was at an effective stop as the 'patriotism' flowed through the veins of each and every American wanting to get their revenge on the evil terrorists that killed thousands of innocents — by, in turn, killing thousands of Middle Eastern civilians. It was, and still is, a sad time for the US news media. The Bush administration always needs a scapegoat it seems.

The allegations that Iran is promoting Iraqi violence to a great extend are questionable. Even if Iran is, and that is a good possibility, the White House is most certainly blowing it out of proportion in able to blame someone for the problems in Iraq. Now that they've somewhat admitted that Iraq is not going too well, they need someone to blame besides Congress, Democrats, and the media. Iran is mostly posturing — on Iraq and their nuclear program (more on that later). Iran has too much to loose.

Iraqis already fed up with the US v. Iran fighting (political or physical), and their using Iraq as a proxy.

Cheney has repeatedly warned Iran not to 'meddle' in Iraqi affairs; the Iraq Study Group, and other rational voices, have said even though Iran is not perfect it's best for everyone the US work with them on Iraq.

There has been plenty of talk on attacking Iran also, of course it is next to impossible the Bush administration would try to pull a preemptive stunt like that, especially without the support of even their hawkish base.

Update: Good blog post on Iran here.

Technorati technorati tags: , , , , , ,

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

President Ahmadinejad's real views are summarized on this website: ahmadinejadquotes.blogspot.com

clearthought said...

He worrries me with all his anti-Zionist and anti-Semetic talk, though I have found on interesting and true quote: "Unfortunately, the world is rife with discrimination and poverty.

Discrimination produces hatred, war and terrorism. They all share the common root of lack of spirituality coupled with injustice."
Also: " I'm surprised why American politicians are so sensitive and biased with regard to Israel. Is there a relationship, to speak with such prejudice?

Everyone is prevented from questioning the regime. Whenever a question is raised, some American politicians react very strongly to it, whereas we know there's a lot being said about many other countries around the world."
Thanks for the link, what are your views on Ahmadinejad, whom I personally have a strong distaste for?