The New Great Game

Newsweek Web Exclusive

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Silent-water @ 08/22/2008 1:09:03 AM

    Don't you know it is the US, with people like you, that is the biggest threat to the peace of the world.

    • Posted By: pbarosso @ 08/22/2008 3:01:49 AM

      wow, i guess you are right! we americans have such a dangerous attitude that the rest of the world is dying to come here and become successfull! no youre right there are no boat loads of hatians and dominicans, truckloads of mexican, or chinese stowing away to come to america. truth is, it is so good over here that you are all filled with hate that you cannot have the same opportunitiers to be safe and well fed. hey you can still apply for a visa and come over, we are all mostly nice people, heck you can even stay with me until you find a job! then youll see whay everybodyhates us. they hate europe too but they dont have the resources to police the world. they have the US to do it for them.

  • Posted By: RazzMatazz1979 @ 08/21/2008 9:40:14 PM

    As a Iranian who has been against the regime in Iran and living in UK for the past 30 years, seeing all the injustices committed by the West towards the Iranian people, I am all for Iran to have the nuclear technology as we do need it, and I can assure everyone that Iran does not need the BOMB to fight anyone as every Iranian will rise to fight anyone who wants to stop Iran to secure its right to have nuclear technology. In fact Iran has been more transparent about its intentions, what the American administration is worried about is the Oil Iran will not be using and exporting to the West and not being relying on the West for its technology and the West cannot force its intensions on the Iranians anymore. For every four barrels of Oil Iran would send to US to convert to Petroleum, Americans would keep 1 and return 3 to Iran, now if the Iranians do not send this anymore or send less than it usually does, that is less dollars out of the American organizations and more Iran would reserve its independencies. Attacking Iran would be the worse mistakes the West could commit as they found out during the eight years war between Iran and Iraq, where 32 countries helping the Iraqis, now few of these countries were, US, UK, Russia, France, Germany, Italy, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, United Arab Emirates and the rest of the idiots who decided Iran was the bad guy, in fact the only reason the regime Iran has lasted this long was because of that War. Iranians had just come out of a revolution and were ready to stand up to someone else like the regime which is in Iran, but a Arab nation was attacking the Iranians, this could never happen. Now if the US ever wants to attack Iran, the only way they can succeed would be to attack from day one with nuclear weapons and destroy Iran totally and every Iranian, as the history of the country has proven, Iranians will fight to the last drop of blood. And they will rail road anything standing in front of them. Please, please, for the sake of humanity and man kind, tell the Americans and the Israelis to stay away from Iran, and let the Iranians handle everything themselves.

    • Posted By: pbarosso @ 08/22/2008 2:58:09 AM

      so you say that we should attack iran with nuclear weapons from day one eh? they will fight till the last man? the germans and japanese thought this way too or has history taught you nothing? the japanese were everybit as fanatical as the iranians. they bowed to our wishes, and so will you. people cant live without food and water and as soon as we poison all the wells and aquifers, kill off the food supplies, your people will die off, and then we could just walk in. do you even think what war is like, look at how we steamrolled europe. its bigger and more harshly climed than iran. give me a break.

  • Posted By: texjuanon @ 08/21/2008 3:07:15 PM

    The arguments here against the Iranians have validity, but this leads to a truly interesting possibility: Might it be possible for the United States to be the "third party," that is, befriending both Russia and Iran to help maintain Middle Eastern peace and stability? Or is that difficult role beyond our diplomatic capability? I'm afraid that it is, particularly in light of sectarian obstacles.

  • Posted By: texjuanon @ 08/21/2008 2:53:18 PM

    This is a fine analysis, and worthy of serious consideration. Often, U.S. foreign policy seems to ignore the essential historical context of a particular situation, along with knee-jerk militarism, in the sole interest of the immediate crisis or perceived threat. The Iranians might be receptive to an American overture, especially in light of the USA's gracious elimination of their own greatest threat -- Iraq.

  • Posted By: jackafuss @ 08/21/2008 2:50:48 PM

    Iran is funding road side bombs, suicide bombers and Hezbollah. Russia is pushing back against the spread of NATO. Russia was not happy about US missile systems in the Czech Republic or Poland. Still, the last thing Russia wants is a nuclear armed Iran. Russia has voted for sanctions three times. Russia wants to join the WTO, Russia wants to be a party to the GNEP. You are confusing negotiations with horror.

  • Posted By: orodionov @ 08/21/2008 2:42:43 PM

    "???The Iranians are hard bargainers with regional ambitions of their own, but they are not irrational, and their primary interest is security. Oddly enough, Washington may find that the U.S. benefits by helping them feel safer, not more threatened???" Using the same argument, why not listen and negotiate with Russians??? They are much more rational then Iranians. Unlike Iran, Russian interests are easy to understand and Russian leaders are fully predictable! This new East-West conflict is direct product of completely incomprehensible and plainly dumb US foreign policy over the last 20 years and especially the last 8 under Bush. Russian interests were completely ignored in Serbia, Kosovo, Iraq and especially in Russian near-abroad ( former soviet republics ). Just like US interests outlined in Monroe doctrine, Russia has valid concerns as related to its near-abroad. US chose the path of arrogance and nonchalant that spoiled the promising US Russian relationships of early 1990s and early 2000s.

  • Posted By: Jack Prentiss @ 08/21/2008 2:36:50 PM

    Actually, by getting on Russia's case for no good reason we're just pushing them closer to Iran.

    As for us using the carrot of an alliance with America to pull Iran away from Russia, the Zionist lobby would never allow it, so you're basically just talking about unicorns and warlocks in this article.

  • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 08/21/2008 2:30:11 PM

    If this is not handled with kid gloves, then we may very well be watching the begining of WWIII. Quick, send Obama to give the Soviets a speech!!!!!! Talk about hope and change, see if that works as well on the Soviets as it does on the liberals.

    • Posted By: nate31 @ 08/21/2008 2:34:30 PM

      If you are worried that this may be the beginning of WWIII, wouldn't you want the man who wants to open up dialogues with the rest of the world, not the idiot who sung "Bomb, bomb, Iran." I don't know sounds logical.

  • Posted By: NAzee @ 08/21/2008 2:20:31 PM

    Mr. Dickey has the debate exactly right. The United States suffers from short-term amnesia while the persians are "millenial-minded." It didn't take long for the Russians to feel claustrophobic within their own borders. But it is taking long for the Iranians to start "World War III" as Mr. Bush has prophesized. In fact there can be no better strategic ally fo rthe US in the Middle East, aside from Isreal, than Iran. Iran's strategic location can be used as a bulwark against the spread of Sunni extremism and Russian Imperialism. Besides the Iranians actually like the Americans. How many other Middle East nations can we say that about?
    Washington has habitually picked its friends on who's courting it best, at the given time. Isn't it time to heed the advice of elders and check their pasts too? By that measure, we should have always romanced Iran while keeping an eye on the "bear" to its north.

  • Posted By: nahummer @ 08/21/2008 2:05:33 PM

    I'll believe it when I see it, the US using diplomacy, or anything less subtle than a hammer over the head. http://theendisalwaysnear.blogspot.com/2008/05/when-talking-became-bad-thing.html
    Let's hope they can, otherwise we're in for a nasty couple months. www.theendisalwaysnear.blogspot.com

  • Posted By: jnakhoul @ 08/21/2008 1:45:34 PM

    diplomacy to solve or conflicts... no it couldn't be, thats for the sissy europeans right

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse