Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, March 07, 2008
Diana West :: Townhall.com Columnist
Iran's Betrayal Leaves U.S. Suffering Pulp Fiction
by Diana West
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


I can't think of a point of historic comparison to the figurative bed we have made for ourselves in Iraq -- particularly now that our Iraqi allies have welcomed our Iranian enemies right into it.

Maybe the way to understand international affairs is to turn not to history but to pulp fiction -- namely, the old love triangle. The good guy (us, natch), has been betrayed by the love object he supports and defends (Iraq), having been left to watch and stew as she gallivants with his rival (Iran).

In real life, of course, Iran is responsible for many of our nearly 4,000 war dead in Iraq, many of our nearly 30,000 war-wounded in Iraq, along with murders, kidnappings and torture of Americans throughout the Middle East over the past quarter-century through its terrorist proxy Hezbollah.

This all makes Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's visit to Baghdad a stinging Mesopotamian slap across the American face. And don't forget that Iran's leader, the classic heavy in our plot, was quite possibly a participant in the 1979 Iranian seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and ensuing 444-day hostage crisis.

As a potboiler, such triangle stuff works. As post-9/11 U.S. foreign policy, it's certifiably insane. We are living and dying for a ward-like "ally" who is happy to cozy up to our worst enemy. Weirdly enough, no one seems to notice.

So let's review. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- nuke-seeking Holocaust-denier, homosexual-and-apostate-slayer, and wannabe destroyer of both the Great (United States) and Little (Israel) Satans -- was just this week the honored guest of the Iraqi government. And yes, that would be the same Iraqi government the U.S. taxpayer is supporting to the tune of $200 million a day.

The countries share more than a border. As USA Today pointed out, "Saddam Hussein was replaced by a new crop of Shiite leaders, many of whom were groomed during years of exile in predominantly Shiite Iran. Many of Iraq's Kurdish leaders have also spent years in exile in Iran and retain close ties there." And some, including Iraq's senior religious leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, have never given up Iranian citizenship.

This may explain why Iraqis rolled out the red carpet (literally) for Ahmadinejad, but not why we are sappy enough to pretend nothing significant happened -- beginning with the infuriating fact that Ahmadinejad, on his ceremonial arrival in Baghdad, required minimal security compared to the furtive security gauntlet American leaders must run. There's a reason, of course: Iranian-supplied bombs and rockets endanger American presidents, not Iranian ones.

At the Iraqi presidential palace, Ahmadinejad was greeted with multiple kisses from Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. An Iraqi military honor guard -- make that a U.S.-trained Iraqi military honor guard -- saluted the two leaders. An Iraqi military band -- make that a U.S.-trained Iraqi military band -- also played the Iranian and the Iraqi anthems. "Call me Uncle Jalal," Mr. Talabani told Ahmadinejad. "Iraqis don't like Americans," Ahmadinejad told the world.

And so went Iran's "brotherly" visit to Iraq, as if U.S. protests (and U.S. casualties) over Iran's violent subversion of the country didn't exist. There were political meetings, gas, oil and electrical agreements, and an Iranian interest-free $1 billion loan. To cap things off, Iraq and Iran issued a joint statement condemning Israel, America's bona fide ally in the region, for taking belated action in Gaza to stop Hamas from firing Iranian-supplied rockets into Israeli towns. (Did I mention Hamas gets Iranian support?)

It's not a question of which side Iraq is on. Certainly, as Iraq becomes what Radio Free Europe analyst Kathleen Ridolfo described as "economically, if not politically subordinate to Iran," that becomes increasingly clear. More disturbing is why we think we're on the same side -- why we think there's a future for us in this and similar relationships.

The fact is, this unsuitable menage isn't unique to Iraq. Desperately naive American courtships across the Middle East follow similar patterns of hypocrisy, deceit and danger. From Saudi Arabia to Egypt, artificial, if costly, American "alliances" are mocked and trashed by such countries' aid and abetment of jihad. Just this week, the Washington Times reported that oil-rich Qatar is massively underwriting Hamas. At the same time, Qatar -- which hosts a colossal pre-positioning base for the U.S. military -- is supposed to be a "moderate" Islamic ally of ours. What next -- permanent U.S. military bases in a Shiite-Kurdish satellite of Iran? I wonder whether we will ever walk out on these destructive relationships and recover our self-respect.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Diana West is a contributing columnist for Townhall.com and author of the new book, The Death of the Grown-up: How America's Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Diana West's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Possible solution
....and you call yourself civilized.

posible solution
Why don't we invite all of Israel over here for a long weekend... and during that time nuke the entire area.

On Monday morning tell Israel... you're welcome to whatever's left.

So...
Shempy,
Hitler would be embarrassed if he read your crap.
What is your inmate number?

So....
......what the he** would you have us do? Leave and let Iran take over ?
Personally, i think if they are truly that ungrateful, we should do what I suggested back in September of '01 : Nuke the whole damn area and start from scratch. Screw 'em all. Really. Just start lobbing nukes-- first one at Mecca, next Tehran, and go from there. Heck, may as well put Jerusalem on the list, just to be fair. That whole part of the world is a stinking cess-pool of ignorance, hatred, and 12th Century ideology. Wipe it clean. Turn it into a sheet of glass. A parking lot.

I know it'll never happen. But a man can dream, can't he? I've been having this dream since they took our embassy back in '79. Wipe that gutter religion from the face of the earth. Hmmmm- mmmm, now that's good coffee!

maverick
Good points.
Few acknowledge that given recent history, the average iraqi has little reason to trust in a secure future, especially with our democratic leadership's continual screeching for us to leave them high and dry, and an election coming in which the anointed one has said that's what he'd do.

Iraq is doing what is best for Iraq
What's been in the minds of the Iraqi people since the Democrats decided to take an active part in this war. Timetables and withdrawals. Being the true blue American's Democrats are, they said early in the war they didn't want to pick sides, yet it was they who called constantly for timetables and withdrawals. We don't live next door to Iran, Iraq does. Let's not forget also, these are Muslims. If the killings of innocent civilians can come to a stop and Iraq can begin to rebuild without American troops having to be present, so be it. Isn't this what the critics of the war have been complaining about. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has taken a Presidential step in the future of his country, being it right or wrong and still the critics cry. Whatever comes of the meeting between Ahmadinejad and Talabani is on Talabani's shoulders not our. We did our part, now it's time for the Iraqi government to do theirs and take that step to self governing if we let them.

Ms. West
First of all title should say 'Iraq' instead of 'Iran'. Secondly, Diana, WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?
I hope our leaders learned someting from this and will stop taking advice from religious nuts and neo-cons to run this country.

stevel
Yes, I think we all agree about the meaning of IED's. The article, however was about kisses and hugs.

are the enemies
of your enemies really just both enemies; ooh, your poor little Americans, so many enemies and so little time . . .

Well good thing you have alot of guns that way you can just continue killing, since war and weapons are about the only exporting economy you have left

Self-respect
"I wonder whether we will ever walk out on these destructive relationships and recover our self-respect."

Only if and when the United States no longer needs to import foreign oil.

Here's a rule of thumb for you: When ANY politician promises to fight terrorism, don't believe him until he tells you what he plans to do about America's dependence on foreign oil.


for SunThe1
SunThe1 writes: "I believe that in that culture, the hug and kiss routine do not mean what westerners take them to mean, and hospitality is not optional."

I believe that the IEDs that are blowing up American soldiers and the numerous attempts to assassinate visiting American (but not Iranian) officials, mean exactly what Westerners think they mean.


Ms. West:

You would have done well before writing this column to consult with someone who understands ME culture, who could explain to you whether these things (the hugs, kisses and hospitality) are as meaningful as you think they are.

I believe that in that culture, the hug and kiss routine do not mean what westerners take them to mean, and hospitality is not optional.

You ought to consult before drawing conclusions about significance lest you not only appear ignorant, but get lots of other westerners to follow suit.

More proof
If any was needed, that the military conquest
of Iraq should have been followed by action
against Iran and Syria.

Iraq as a Middle Eastern model for regional
democracy isn't working so well; Iraq as a
staging ground was and is a better idea.

somewhat shocking
I don't think I have ever agreed with as much of a West column.

One minor point. The title should say Iraq, not Iran. As it is the title makes sense.

For the rest of it the only oddity is that any of this is surprising. Why did anyone think that if we pre-emptively invaded Sunni-led Iraq we wouldn't wind up with a Shiite led government that was close to Iran and hates Israel?

Obviously the question remains, having helped Iran with out invasion of Iraq, what do we do now. 5 years ago the answer was easy, we should not do something as stupid as launching an invasion of Iraq. Hopefully we will soon have a President who was able to recognize that folly before it became a quagmire.

It's doubtful Diana...

...as long as we continue to elect buffoons who are incapable of critical thought or have any sense of historical perspective.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.