  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 Molly Ivins: An Outbreak of Diplomacy in the West WingPosted on Jun 7, 2006By Molly Ivins AUSTIN, Texas—It occasionally occurs to me that if I could understand the Bush administration’s foreign policy, I might like it. After months of threatening Iran with everything up to and including nuclear war, we are now full of Sweet Reason and offering to have diplomatic talks with the very people we have been denouncing as Beyond Vile. I never mind a good about-face in foreign policy myself. Always reminds me of the times when that great duo Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger decided it would be a good thing to convince the world they were both quite perfectly mad. They succeeded. (Bonus point: What did Richard Nixon say upon first seeing the Great Wall of China? He said, “This is, indeed, a great wall.” Almost as good as the time George H.W. Bush barfed on the prime minister of Japan.) John Bolton is my favorite Bush administration diplomat. He’s the one they sent to the United Nations, since he has all the characteristics of a really clumsy bull in a china shop. Ambassador Bolton, his white mustache positively bristling in horror, has assured us over and over that we cannot consent to have diplomatic talks with Iran No Matter What. Iran’s highly unpleasant President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad started uttering anti-Semitic screeds. Condoleezza Rice has been wandering around saying the same thing as Bolton to the European allies, who kept tugging her sleeve and whispering, “Have talks, good plan, we’ll do the hard part.” At least Rice realized threatening Iran was getting us nowhere—particularly since we had already violated the nuclear weapons ban by making a deal with India. The great diplomatic lesson of the Cuban Missile Crisis during JFK’s presidency is that one can always choose to hear the less hostile response. Likewise, we can give a two-toned response—both “no enrichment” and “some enrichment.” It’s so entirely pleasant to see the Bushies actually using diplomacy, one veritably vaults toward other cases where it might be helpful. All of Latin America? China? Denny Hastert? Who knows where this might take us. And all with John Bolton in the lead, his moustache at full bristle, dropping imprecations upon one and all. I’m telling you, there’s a great sitcom in this. Meanwhile, there is nothing funny about Iraq, as we slide toward being just one more militia in the chaos. I had a slightly insane discussion the other day with a winger who wanted urgently for me to understand that the Haditha massacre is the kind of thing that happens in war. Whereas I was trying to point out to him that the Haditha massacre is the kind of thing that happens in war. I think we both got that massacres occur in war—but for me, it felt like a “don’t teach your grandma to suck eggs” moment. Why would anyone who hadn’t lived through My Lai try to explain Haditha? I realize it’s silly to let really stupid people upset you, but I have had it with the wingnuts who go about claiming that liberals are delighted about Haditha or want to use it for nefarious public relations purposes. Listen, twits, if you can’t stop your petty little partisan political games long to enough to recognize Sad when you see it, then shut up. To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. SHARE THIS TRUTHDIG ARTICLE:
|
|
Why Obama Can Keep Gates
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By John, June 12, 2006 at 2:04 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Somebody pointed out that Bush at last realizes invading Iran would be pointless. Bush invaded Afghanistan (for good reason), and left it with an Islamic republic. He invaded Iraq and hasn’t left it yet, but it now is an Islamic Republic. But Iran is already an Islamic republic, mission already accomplished, so Bush settles on diplomacy.
Report thisBy alex 2012, June 9, 2006 at 3:19 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Prayers Leader of Tehran Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati said on Friday:
“Iran’s right to have access to peaceful nuclear technology is undeniable. The Iranian nation and officials and Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei) will not accept Iran’s withdrawal from its inalienable rights. The Iranian nation will achieve the (nuclear) right.”
Iran claims that nuclear weapons are against Islam, that their program is peaceful and that they have continually allowed UN inspectors to search the facilities. Whether BushCo chooses to believe this or not, it is undeniable that what Iran is doing, processing fuel grade uranium, is NOT in violation of international law.
By way of comparison, BushCo walked away from the ABM Treaty, threw out the comprehensive test ban treaty, nullified all efforts to strengthen the biological weapons convention, and sabotaged the implementation of the chemical weapons convention. Hypocrisy of the worst kind.
http://www.operation2012.com
Report thisBy Tony Waters, June 8, 2006 at 11:49 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Molly,
Could it simply be that Congo Lisa-Rice realized that the U.S. no longer has an army with which to threaten? In Iraq, U.S. forces are beginning to resemble the Monty Python character whose four limbs had just been hacked off: “Come back! I haven’t finished with you yet.”
Report thisBy felicity smith, June 8, 2006 at 10:31 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Trying to make sense of the Bush administration’s words, actions, policies is like trying to make sense of a conversation you’re having with an individual who’s severely psychologically challenged. Some of us keep trying. I gave up years ago. Then there’s that big world out their which keeps obeying George. “Bring ‘em on!” Okay. “Iran, the Axis of Evil.” Okay, we can do that. Somebody must send George to his room - without his dinner.
Report thisBy Hilding Lindquist, June 8, 2006 at 5:35 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Oil. It’s all about oil, isn’t it?
When the Texas oilmen woke up and looked at a map and they realized that nuking Iran could easily end up in shutting down the Strait of Hormuz ... well, diplomacy moved up on the list of options.
It’s amazing how the Bush/Cheney/Rice/Rumsfled (alpha order) gang could so quickly turn the tide in favor of Iran by getting rid of Saddam and then turning Iraq over to cohorts of the Iranians.
I am waiting for the Neocons to explain their master plan after the fact ... as some of our best and brightest continue to give their lives to strengthen Iran’s hand in the region.
Was our invasion of Iraq some sort of Trojan horse gambit? OK, OK, times up! Show us the REAL plan. PLEASE! I’m getting a little worried here, George.
George? ... Dick? ... Condie? ... Rummy?
Oh my god! They call him “Rummy”?
Report thisBy davr, June 8, 2006 at 1:15 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush is a foul up. Bush/Republicans are foul ups. Everything foul ups do is all fouled up.
Report thisBy rob payne, June 8, 2006 at 12:04 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush wants to give Iran a nuclear reactor for producing electricity in exchange for Iran giving up its nuclear weapon making program. The only problem is that in 2005 congress passed a law that forbids exporting any nuclear materials or equipment on the State Department’s list of countries that support terrorism Iran being on that list. But then Bush of course has his signing statements that allow him to ignore the laws of the land.
But what in the wide wonderful world is going on? On one hand it would seem that Bush is calling Iran’s bluff that all they (Iran) want to do is build reactors to produce electricity. Obviously if we give Iran reactors then they will have no excuse to continue a nuclear program the Iranians claim to be solely an electrical producer.
On the other hand if Bush still really wants to invade Iran and if Iran refuses the nuclear reactor because they really want a bomb Bush now can say with a clear conscience that Iran is not cooperating so it is time for military action.
Adding to the confusion is Iran seems to be training Iraqis who cross the border into Iran where they receive military training and then come back across the border in order to put the training to use. In fact much of southern Iraq seems to be under Iranian influence so how does that figure into all this?
So has Bush turned over a new leaf? Is he offering Iran an easy face-saving out from their tough stance against the U.S. and Europe or is he looking for an excuse to use his bunker busters?
I think we will just have to wait and see. Frankly I would be amazed if Bush has suddenly become a responsible leader.
Report thisBy antoinette, June 7, 2006 at 10:20 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
You shouldve told that “twit” that the US Army should not, need to establish a belated core-Values’ refresher course for Baby Killers.
Report thisBy tony Page, June 7, 2006 at 2:50 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Oh Mollie,
You’re one of the few things that keep me from nuking Texas just for allowing Georgie to set up shop there.
Love,
Mahmoud
PS Do you like my mustache too?
OMG! I’m channeling a clever wingnut.
Report this