CONDOLEEZZA RICE LEGITIMIZES IRAN
By Joel C Pousson
American soldiers fighting in the Global War on Terror may have thought that support for their mission among Democrat Party operatives on Capitol Hill was, at most, lukewarm.
Now, the men and women fighting every day in Iraq have another Washingtonian insider to regard with wary eyes, and her name is Condoleezza Rice, the United States Secretary of State.
The UK's Financial Times (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3f96545e-f0f9-11db-838b-000b5df10621.html) reports that Madame Secretary Rice has issued an open invitation to the very government that has fed, supplied and financed the Iraqi insurgency to sit down at the diplomatic table and make recommendations to bring stability to Iraq.
With language straight out of the milquetoast "Iraq Study Group" recommendations (http://www.usip.org/isg/iraq_study_group_report/report/1206/iraq_study_group_report.pdf), Madame Secretary Rice issued an open diplomatic invitation to legitimize the terror-sponsor Iran. Now the Mullahs are asked to join the discussion on the pacification of Iraq.
One may ask what recommendations Ahmadinejad's representatives may offer at this meeting; perhaps a full and complete retreat by US forces in the Global War on Terror, a revocation of our duty to the Iraqi people struggling to establish their representative republic, and capitulation to the Iranian-directed insurgency in Iraq. Iran's involvement in supplying weapons killing Coalition troops in Iraq is obvious (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2866573&page=1). Now, per the US State Department, Iraqis are to ask advice on how to make their lives better from the sponsors of the insurgency.
Moderate Muslims who have fought and to stabilize the situation in Iraq along with the Coalition, facing IEDs and insurgencies directed right from Tehran, are now to understand that the US State Department finds it far too inconvenient to fight the terrorism of the Mullahs.
This new policy from State is in direct opposition to President Bush's stated goals to confront the Axis of Evil in his State of the Union speech of January, 2002. Although President Bush stated clearly that:
"Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent…we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice….we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world."
The US has done nothing to confront Iran's unapologetic support for terrorism. Iran has established terror training camps and conducted terrorism planning and attacks against the US and allies (http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5956) and has used its own corrupt justice system to absolve domestic terrorists of guilt in attacks on its own people (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6557679.stm).
The President also stated in that State of the Union speech that "…some governments will be timid in the face of terror. And make no mistake about it: If they do not act, America will…[a]ll nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security."
However, Iran and its handmaiden, Syria, have boldly conducted terror training and operations without a single American reprisal (http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20070219-102043-1711r.htm). Even in the face of Iran's blatant involvement in terrorism and attacks on US troops in Iraq, the State Department has responded, not by calling for regime change in Iran or supporting resistance groups there, but praising Iran as a partner in the Middle East and a legitimate power broker.
Nicholas Burns, Undersecretary for Political Affairs, asked the Iranian to work with the US to resolve the situation in Iraq, ignoring Iranian culpability: "I would say that the focus of our efforts should be on the following: to try to convince the Iranian government to play a more productive role, a more positive role to enforce civility in Iraq itself." (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070413/pl_afp/irannuclearpoliticsus_070413143611)
The President had a different take:
"America will take the side of brave men and women who advocate these values around the world, including the Islamic world, because we have a greater objective than eliminating threats and containing resentment. We seek a just and peaceful world beyond the war on terror."
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html]
However, the careerists at State do not approve of the War on Terror. They cannot be bothered with continuing the march of freedom. It is far more important to implement the recommendations of politicians Lee Hamilton and James Baker III, such as the diplomatic initiatives towards the terror sponsoring government of Iran.
The sacrifices of over three thousand US families are to be ignored in the spirit of "diplomatic pragmatism" enshrined in the State Department. US military commanders should be livid at this appeasement of the main enemy in the Middle East, a nation not only pursuing the slaughter of innocents in support of political goals, but is rushing to develop nuclear weapons it will use the moment the first operational warhead is produced.
The President stated clearly in that State of the Union address that "…[i]f we stop now, leaving terror camps intact and terror states unchecked, our sense of security would be false and temporary. History has called America and our allies to action, and it is both our responsibility and our privilege to fight freedom's fight."
Sadly for the Iranian people, the US State Department simply was not listening.
Joel C Pousson is a human rights activist and Campaign Manager of www.FutureOfIran.com.
By Joel C Pousson
American soldiers fighting in the Global War on Terror may have thought that support for their mission among Democrat Party operatives on Capitol Hill was, at most, lukewarm.
Now, the men and women fighting every day in Iraq have another Washingtonian insider to regard with wary eyes, and her name is Condoleezza Rice, the United States Secretary of State.
The UK's Financial Times (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3f96545e-f0f9-11db-838b-000b5df10621.html) reports that Madame Secretary Rice has issued an open invitation to the very government that has fed, supplied and financed the Iraqi insurgency to sit down at the diplomatic table and make recommendations to bring stability to Iraq.
With language straight out of the milquetoast "Iraq Study Group" recommendations (http://www.usip.org/isg/iraq_study_group_report/report/1206/iraq_study_group_report.pdf), Madame Secretary Rice issued an open diplomatic invitation to legitimize the terror-sponsor Iran. Now the Mullahs are asked to join the discussion on the pacification of Iraq.
One may ask what recommendations Ahmadinejad's representatives may offer at this meeting; perhaps a full and complete retreat by US forces in the Global War on Terror, a revocation of our duty to the Iraqi people struggling to establish their representative republic, and capitulation to the Iranian-directed insurgency in Iraq. Iran's involvement in supplying weapons killing Coalition troops in Iraq is obvious (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2866573&page=1). Now, per the US State Department, Iraqis are to ask advice on how to make their lives better from the sponsors of the insurgency.
Moderate Muslims who have fought and to stabilize the situation in Iraq along with the Coalition, facing IEDs and insurgencies directed right from Tehran, are now to understand that the US State Department finds it far too inconvenient to fight the terrorism of the Mullahs.
This new policy from State is in direct opposition to President Bush's stated goals to confront the Axis of Evil in his State of the Union speech of January, 2002. Although President Bush stated clearly that:
"Our nation will continue to be steadfast and patient and persistent…we will shut down terrorist camps, disrupt terrorist plans, and bring terrorists to justice….we must prevent the terrorists and regimes who seek chemical, biological or nuclear weapons from threatening the United States and the world."
The US has done nothing to confront Iran's unapologetic support for terrorism. Iran has established terror training camps and conducted terrorism planning and attacks against the US and allies (http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5956) and has used its own corrupt justice system to absolve domestic terrorists of guilt in attacks on its own people (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6557679.stm).
The President also stated in that State of the Union speech that "…some governments will be timid in the face of terror. And make no mistake about it: If they do not act, America will…[a]ll nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation's security."
However, Iran and its handmaiden, Syria, have boldly conducted terror training and operations without a single American reprisal (http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20070219-102043-1711r.htm). Even in the face of Iran's blatant involvement in terrorism and attacks on US troops in Iraq, the State Department has responded, not by calling for regime change in Iran or supporting resistance groups there, but praising Iran as a partner in the Middle East and a legitimate power broker.
Nicholas Burns, Undersecretary for Political Affairs, asked the Iranian to work with the US to resolve the situation in Iraq, ignoring Iranian culpability: "I would say that the focus of our efforts should be on the following: to try to convince the Iranian government to play a more productive role, a more positive role to enforce civility in Iraq itself." (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070413/pl_afp/irannuclearpoliticsus_070413143611)
The President had a different take:
"America will take the side of brave men and women who advocate these values around the world, including the Islamic world, because we have a greater objective than eliminating threats and containing resentment. We seek a just and peaceful world beyond the war on terror."
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html]
However, the careerists at State do not approve of the War on Terror. They cannot be bothered with continuing the march of freedom. It is far more important to implement the recommendations of politicians Lee Hamilton and James Baker III, such as the diplomatic initiatives towards the terror sponsoring government of Iran.
The sacrifices of over three thousand US families are to be ignored in the spirit of "diplomatic pragmatism" enshrined in the State Department. US military commanders should be livid at this appeasement of the main enemy in the Middle East, a nation not only pursuing the slaughter of innocents in support of political goals, but is rushing to develop nuclear weapons it will use the moment the first operational warhead is produced.
The President stated clearly in that State of the Union address that "…[i]f we stop now, leaving terror camps intact and terror states unchecked, our sense of security would be false and temporary. History has called America and our allies to action, and it is both our responsibility and our privilege to fight freedom's fight."
Sadly for the Iranian people, the US State Department simply was not listening.
Joel C Pousson is a human rights activist and Campaign Manager of www.FutureOfIran.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment