Boot: Tough Love In Middle East

[Annie]

and some causal fallout from the NIE report:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110010968

The Gulf States and Iran
America and Israel aren't the only ones worried about the mullahs getting a nuclear bomb.

BY MAX BOOT
Sunday, December 9, 2007 12:01 a.m.

The release of the new National Intelligence Estimate will provide more fodder for those who claim that "neoconservative ideologues" and the "Israel lobby" are overly alarmed about the rise of Iran. In reality, some of those most worried about the mullahs wear flowing headdresses, not yarmulkes, and they have good cause for concern, notwithstanding the sanguine tilt many news accounts put on the NIE.

I recently visited the Persian Gulf region as part of a delegation of American policy wonks organized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Throughout our meetings in the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, the top issue was Iran's ambitions to dominate the region.

Evidence of those imperial designs is not hard to find. The Iranians are aiding extremists who are undermining nascent democracies in Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon. The beneficiaries of Tehran's largess include Hamas, Hezbollah and even, the evidence indicates, al Qaeda. (Saudi officials are quietly furious that Tehran has given refuge to some suspects in the 2003 Riyadh attacks.) Iran is building up its military arsenal, and has threatened to shut down the Persian Gulf (or, as Arabs call it, the Arabian Gulf).

What particularly concerns Gulf Arabs is the possibility that Iran could go nuclear--a concern unlikely to be erased by the ambiguous findings of the new NIE. While this NIE claims that Iran stopped its nuclear-weapons program in 2003 (in direct contradiction to an NIE finding issued just two years ago that "Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons"), it concedes that "Iran's civilian uranium enrichment program is continuing." Such a "civilian" program could be converted speedily and stealthily to military use. As the new NIE notes, "Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to do so."

That thought fills Sunni Arabs with dread. "If we accept Iran as a nuclear power that is like accepting Hitler in 1933-34," warned one senior Arab official, using the kind of analogy that back in Washington would get him dismissed as a neocon warmonger.

...

This is largely because the GCC states, for all their economic might, have gotten used to thinking of themselves as political and military weaklings. As much as they may resent and criticize us, they feel utterly dependent on us for their defense.

The U.S. has a major stake in defending states with so much oil, and they do provide valuable cooperation in basing and logistics. But these states can and should do more. For a start, they should take steps to integrate their armed forces, so that they can turn the GCC into a NATO-like fighting force. And if President Bush or (more likely) his successor decides to pre-empt Iran, it will be important, as in the 1991 Gulf War, to have participation, if only symbolic, from Arab states, so that the conflict cannot be cast as one pitting "Zionists" and "crusaders" against innocent Muslims.

We need to tell the Gulf Arabs that if they expect the U.S. to stand with them in the future, they need to stand with us publicly, not just privately. At the very least they need to stop kicking us in the shins, as King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia did earlier this year by condemning as "illegitimate" the "foreign occupation" of Iraq (even though he doesn't want us to leave).

The Saudi decision to attend the Annapolis meeting is a nice gesture in favor of the Bush administration's newfound priorities, but it does little to address the most pressing issue confronting the Middle East. A Gulf-wide policy of getting tougher with Iran--diplomatically and economically and, if need be, militarily--would do a lot more good.

 

[William Joyce]

That thought fills Sunni Arabs with dread. "If we accept Iran as a nuclear power that is like accepting Hitler in 1933-34," warned one senior Arab official, using the kind of analogy that back in Washington would get him dismissed as a neocon warmonger.

Yes, and Saddam was a Sunni, a clear minority group in Iraq where the Shi'ites are far more numerous. The toppling of Saddam was what filled that guy with dread, too. No more protection from the hordes.

Boot's essay isn't confirmation that the U.S. should attack Iran. It's yet more confirmation that the disputes in that region don't involve us. But to Boot, who is Jewish, "us" is like the Lone Ranger's "we."

 

[Annie]

That thought fills Sunni Arabs with dread. "If we accept Iran as a nuclear power that is like accepting Hitler in 1933-34," warned one senior Arab official, using the kind of analogy that back in Washington would get him dismissed as a neocon warmonger.

Yes, and Saddam was a Sunni, a clear minority group in Iraq where the Shi'ites are far more numerous. The toppling of Saddam was what filled that guy with dread, too. No more protection from the hordes.

Boot's essay isn't confirmation that the U.S. should attack Iran. It's yet more confirmation that the disputes in that region don't involve us. But to Boot, who is Jewish, "us" is like the Lone Ranger's "we."

And bin Laden is a Shia. What of it? I know you want it to be about the Jews, it just isn't.

 

[DeadCanDance]

And bin Laden is a Shia. What of it? I know you want it to be about the Jews, it just isn't.

No he's not. OBL is not shia. You are completely misinformed on him and al qaeda if you think that.

 

[William Joyce]

And bin Laden is a Shia. What of it? I know you want it to be about the Jews, it just isn't.

I wouldn't care if tomorrow, every Jew in the world said, "eh, screw it. Let's try to lump along ourselves with Israel. Pack up AIPAC, everyone." And they were replaced by every Arab, Turk, Persian and Kazakh saying, "hey, U.S., please send your whole military here to deal with our problems."

I'd still say, my friends, it's not reason for our men and women in uniform to die.

 

[Annie]

No he's not. OBL is not shia. You are completely misinformed on him and al qaeda if you think that.

Ok, I should have looked it up, inform me. I beg to differ as for completely misinformed. I know he's Wahhabi, which I thought was Shia because of SA, but if Sunni, ok.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Ok, I should have looked it up, inform me. I beg to differ as for completely misinformed. I know he's Wahhabi, which I thought was Shia because of SA, but if Sunni, ok.

You've had 7 years since 9/11 to bone up on the nature and scope of the threat against us. You're way, way off. Those rightwing blogs haven't been informing you well. Its no wonder you are prone to conflating all muslim groups, and a nations under one simplistic umbrella of "threat". The informed person learns the nuance between muslim groups and terrorists, and uses that information to assess and prioritize the threats, from the non-threats.

Suffice it to say, that Wahhabism is a form of sunni Islam. Its, in effect, the state religion of Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda is an umbrella for sunni jihaddists.

Amazing, that you completely have it all mucked up and backwards.

 

[Annie]

You've had 7 years since 9/11 to bone up on the nature and scope of the threat against us. You're way, way off. Those rightwing blogs haven't been informing you well. Its no wonder you are prone to conflating all muslim groups, and a nations under one simplistic umbrella of "threat". The informed person learns the nuance between muslim groups and terrorists, and uses that information to assess and prioritize the threats, from the non-threats.

Suffice it to say, that Wahhabism is a form of sunni Islam. Its, in effect, the state religion of Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda is an umbrella for sunni jihaddists.

Amazing, that you completely have it all mucked up and backwards.

f off, you are not only devoid of humor, you are an anal bastard. Not nice to play with, which thankfully means you are NOT one of the brighter liberals on the board. Please, please, put me on ignore, because you are not worth responding to.

 

[DeadCanDance]

It would pay to turn off those rightwing blogs and get informed.

bin laden is not a shia. Sunni Al Qaeda, in fact, hates shia muslims, and particularly persians. Were you aware that there was sectarian violence in iraq between shia and sunni in iraq? That's the problem with you conflating all muslims into one group, and mixing them up so you end up attacking the wrong people. As offensive as the shia iranians are, there are opportunities to engage them as an ally of convenience against sunni fundamentalists (the ones actually attacking us). Iran helped us topple the sunni Taliban government of Afghanistan, because they were rivals of the sunni Taliban. Iran offered to help us fight al qaeda, but Bush turned them down in 2002. What a moron.

 

[Annie]

It would pay to turn off those rightwing blogs and get informed.

bin laden is not a shia. Sunni Al Qaeda, in fact, hates shia muslims, and particularly persians. Were you aware that there was sectarian violence in iraq between shia and sunni in iraq? That's the problem with you conflating all muslims into one group, and mixing them up so you end up attacking the wrong people. As offensive as the shia iranians are, there are opportunities to engage them as an ally of convenience against sunni fundamentalists (the ones actually attacking us). Iran helped us topple the sunni Taliban government of Afghanistan, because they were rivals of the sunni Taliban. Iran offered to help us fight al qaeda, but Bush turned them down in 2002. What a moron.

Ok, now that you've whipped that dead horse. Yeah, Iran offered, while working on the centrifuges they pledged not to have. Whatever, all is good in Muslim nations.