Once a distant, mysterious land, the U.S. has become intensely embroiled in Middle Eastern politics. While simultaneously waging campaigns in both Afghanistan and Iraq, America has turned a wary eye to Iran and its alleged nuclear weapons. With the lives of potentially thousands of soldiers and citizens at stake in both countries, should the U.S. take direct military action against Iran?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
An objective look at history shows that the Cold War was nothing but a series of pragmatic stop-gap measures, a balance-of-power see-saw of shifting alliances. There was no fundamental principle that was fought for. It was not a rational and consistent fight for individual rights and the interests of the US. It was not a battle of ideas.
The very actions taken by US foreign policy to contain communism made the modern Iranian problem possible. How many times did the US shift its support from one country to another, based on nothing other than "will this tick off the Soviets or keep the status quo?"
Why didn't the US attack Iran when it declared war on us, by seizing our embassy and kidnapping our citizens? The answer is because we were paralyzed by pragmatism and altruism, and had abandoned the ideas worth fighting for.
All of this begs the question: What ideas should we fight for?
- C August
August 21, 2008 9:04AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
We might keep in mind how the Cold War started - by America giving half of Europe to Russia. Will we repeat this course by leaving the Mid-East in the hands of fascists?
- Mr Cropper August 22, 2008 11:33AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
The Cold War in short form:
Successes: Nixon (and McDonalds) in China, Cuban Missile Crisis, Military Industrial Complex, Perestroika and Glasnost, MTV, Kennedy and Kruschev...
Failures: Vietnam, Korea, Afganistan, Bay of Pigs, Operation Phoenix, Project MKULTRA, Nuclear Proliferation...
Seriously
- Submariner September 3, 2009 3:02AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
We Must Defeat Vicious Ideologies
- From Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights
By Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights - Advancing Objectivism
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
war will help the islamic regime
If Iran is attacked, the Ahmadinejad-regime will portray itself as a victim and that will unfortunately be a reason for many (illiterate) people to support the regime. It will thus give the islamists more power still.
It's better to support the ones who want to reform the regime from the inside. Lasting result will only come from within. Therefore: help the reformists!
(Sorry if my English is not so good).
- fromholland September 2, 2008 2:48AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
True Victory Does Not Empower Your Enemies
In world war two, the Empire of Japan (A far more powerful nation than Iran can ever hope to aspire) attacked the US. By the end, the US had used all means necessary -- including the first detonated nuclear bomb in history -- to destroy their vicious ideology. The result was not sympathy, victimhood, or an everlasting hatred of the US. The result was the crushing defeat of their spirit, seeing that they cannot win, and they abandoned their ideology as such. Now, Japan is one of the leading economic powerhouses in the world, enjoying conditions unlike ever it had in history.
If the US attacks Iran with overwhelming force -- which need not be a nuclear bomb -- then they will be defeated, as will their ideology. Those who see this will not rally behind them, but instead see that their cause is hopeless. Only then can their be any true reconstruction.
- Sarrisan
September 4, 2008 8:39AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
islamists not keen on admitting defeat
The islamic ideology is not just confined to Iran. It is an agressive ideology that since 14 centuries has spread all over the world and will not suddenly disappear when Iran is attacked. Islamists play the victim-card already and will use every attack to convince muslims to fight for islam.
Best thing to do is a largescale support for reformists (inside and outside Iran) to fight their regime from within, including the sabotage of nuclear installations, and convincing and educating ignorants.
By the way: why does the world accept all this haughty talk about human rights in Europe and America from islamic regimes in de UN who actually violate all these rights (beheadings, hangings, torture, no rigths for minorities) in their own countries?? I think it's time Europe and America turned their backs on this deformed UN!
- fromholland September 6, 2008 4:28AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Only Unconditional Victory can Win
>> "The islamic ideology is not just confined to Iran. It is an agressive ideology that since 14 centuries has spread all over the world and will not suddenly disappear when Iran is attacked. Islamists play the victim-card already and will use every attack to convince muslims to fight for islam."
This is an often reasonable consideration - that they will simply play the victim and win support for their cause. But the only reason their even _have_ a cause, is because of decades of appeasement, from both the US and Europe. If they are shown that, finally, a strong power (In this case the US) will not abide the existence of such an aggressive ideology, then, far from triggering an influx of followers, it will show them that there can be no victory. But this can only happen if they are shown that the US is committed, 100% to use any means to attain victory. Any holding back will only be seen as a sign of weakness.
>> "By the way: why does the world accept all this haughty talk about human rights in Europe and America from islamic regimes in de UN who actually violate all these rights (beheadings, hangings, torture, no rigths for minorities) in their own countries?? I think it's time Europe and America turned their backs on this deformed UN!"
On this, we are wholeheartedly in agreement.
- Sarrisan
September 6, 2008 10:40AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Armies are not the same as ideologies
What this particular argument seems to misunderstand is that both Japan and Germany were defeated militarily. i.e. they had a bunch of tanks and guns and such and when it was become overwhelming clear that we had way more tanks and bombs than they did, they rightfully saw that the specific goals they were trying to achieve were futile. And, very importantly, they had a central power structure that had enough authority to accept defeat.
In the case of the jihaddi ideology, there is no numerical calculation by which either they or we can judge defeat, no point at which surrender suddenly seems the most logical option. If all it takes is 19 dudes and some flight training classes to start two wars, then really the only way to militarily defeat Jihaddism would be to kill everyone who would ever espouse such an ideology. It takes a massive economy and military buildup to bomb Pearl Harbor and hope to get away with it. All it takes is a kid and some hate to create terror.
Basically you can not bomb hate and lunacy into submission.
- Bezukhof September 21, 2008 11:38AM
Reply to this Recommend (1)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Sure You Can
Islamic Totalitarianism has grown massively due to state sponsorship and support, from entities such as Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia. This is precisely because we have left them alone and done nothing. They openly hate us and provoke us because we have proven we will do little to nothing. Terrorists freely move about in Iran and other countries, they have training bases and material support from many of the states they operate in. Their public media (state controlled) extol the virtues of martyrdom and the evil of the US. These are the places to start, with Iran for sure. When we have shown we are serious and no state that supports terrorism will survive, the other countries will take notice and stop their support for terrorism. You can bet their citizens will demand it when they learn that they're next in line for de-terrorization, especially after they've seen a demonstration or two of our commitment.
- Nigel
October 29, 2008 7:04PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.