This new task force finds that the U.S. government’s lack of sustained engagement with Iran harms our national interests in this critical region of the world. The task force also concludes that external efforts to change the current regime are not likely to succeed, and urges the United States to pursue direct dialogue with Tehran on specific areas of mutual concern.Go to Free Iran News / ActivistChat.com and read about a protest against this approach and a demonstration outside the Washington Club.
Here is an excerpt from Roger L. Simon's post, Time Out of War - The Question is Iran:
But I do think the Mullahs are the central enemy (el enemigo principal, as we used to say in my marxist days) of freedom and democracy. Vastly more sophisticated than the Saudis, they will be even more dangerous and powerful when they have nuclear weapons (assuming they haven't already).
Roger L. Simon is not advocating an invasion as the solution to the problem, but I must say that I don't rule out that option, especially after the latest news:
- The Iran Connection by Joe Klein and Adam Zagorin.
A senior U.S. official says the commission has uncovered evidence suggesting that 8 to 10 of the 14 "muscle" hijackers — those who helped gain control of the four 9/11 aircraft and subdue the crew and passengers --passed through Iran between October 2000 and February 2001. (Time magazine, July 26 issue.)
- 9/11: The Iran Factor by Michael Isikoff and Michael Hirsh.
According to a December 2001 memo buried in the files of the National Security Agency, obtained by the commission, Iranian officials instructed their border inspectors not to place Iranian or Afghan stamps in the passports of Saudi terrorists traveling from Osama bin Laden's training camps through Iran. (Newsweek, July 26 issue.)
Hundreds of alleged members of Al-Qaeda, including 18 of its top leaders, and other terror groups are living in Iran, some under tight security, Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported Thursday. (TurkishPress.com / Agence France Presse, 07/15/04.)
An Iranian general collaborated with al Qaeda to arrange the transit through Iran of nine of the September 11 hijackers, the Arabic newspaper Asharq al-Awsat reported on Monday. (Reuters.co.uk, 07/19/04.)
From WorldNetDaily: Regime change in Iran if Bush wins? by Aaron Klein.
Here is an excerpt from Michael A. Ledeen's article, The Discovery of Iran:
Those of you who have followed along these little therapy sessions of mine know of my despair regarding this administration's fecklessness concerning the mullahs. It has pained me enormously, especially because I still believe that this president has a solid understanding of the evil of the Islamic Republic, despite the efforts of the State Department--even after the departure of Haas--to convince him that a really good deal is just minutes away. I have been reduced to begging "faster, please," but I have long since recognized that nothing would happen until after the elections (a potentially suicidal policy). Now the London Times has found a nameless someone in the Bush administration who promises that a second term for W. would bring vigorous support of democratic revolution in Iran, and decisive action against the atomic project. It is beyond me why anyone would take seriously such claims, given the fact that after four years in office this administration still has no Iran policy, and the deputy secretary of State, Richard Armitage, has never backed off his claim that Iran is a democracy, nor has he been gainsaid by any other top official. I certainly hope the Times is right, but I have my doubts. I'm afraid we're not going to get serious about Iran without another 9/11. (American Enterprise Institute, 07/19/04.)
Glenn Reynolds is asking the following question:
Can you say "counterstrike?" Brad DeLong can!
I wrote a post with the title, STRIKE IN / ON IRAN, on 07/02/03.