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
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Pat Buchanan :: Townhall.com Columnist
Ten Days That Shook Tehran
by Pat Buchanan
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Given its monopoly of guns, bet on the Iranian regime. But, in the long run, the ayatollahs have to see the handwriting on the wall.

Let us assume what they insist upon -- that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won the June 12 election; that, even if fraud occurred, it did not decide the outcome. As Ayatollah Khamenei said to loud laughter in his Friday sermon declaring the election valid, "Perhaps 100,000, or 500,000, but how can anyone tamper with 11 million votes?"

Still, the ayatollah and Ahmadinejad must hear the roar of the rapids ahead. Millions of Iranians, perhaps a majority of the professional class and educated young, who shouted, "Death to the Dictatorship," oppose or detest them. How can the regime maintain its present domestic course or foreign policy with its people so visibly divided?

Where do the ayatollah and Ahmadinejad go from here?

If they adopt a harder line, defy Barack Obama and refuse to negotiate their nuclear program, they can continue to enrich uranium, as harsher sanctions are imposed. But to what end adding 1,000 more kilograms?

If they do not intend to build a bomb, why enrich more? And if they do intend to build a bomb, what exactly would that achieve?

For an Iranian bomb would trigger a regional arms race with Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia seeking nuclear weapons. Israel would put its nuclear arsenal on a hair trigger. America would retarget missiles on Tehran. And if a terrorist anywhere detonated a nuclear bomb, Iran would risk annihilation, for everyone would assume Tehran was behind it.

Rather than make Iran more secure, an Iranian bomb would seem to permanently isolate her and possibly subject her to pre-emptive attack.

And how can the Iranians survive continued isolation?

According to U.S. sources, Iran produced 6 million barrels of crude a day in 1974 under the shah. She has not been able to match that since the revolution. War, limited investment, sanctions and a high rate of natural decline of mature oil fields, estimated at 8 percent onshore and 11 percent offshore, are the causes. A 2007 National Academy of Sciences study reported that if the decline rates continue, Iran's exports, which in 2007 averaged 2.4 million barrels per day, could decrease to zero by 2015.

You cannot make up for oil and gas exports with carpets and pistachio nuts.

If Tehran cannot effect a lifting of sanctions and new investments in oil and gas production, she is headed for an economic crisis that will cause an exodus of her brightest young and quadrennial reruns of the 2009 election.

And there are not only deep divisions in Iran between modernists and religious traditionalists, the affluent and the poor, but among ethnic groups. Half of Iran's population is Arab, Kurd, Azeri or Baluchi. In the Kurdish northwest and Baluchi south, secessionists have launched attacks the ayatollah blames on the United States and Israel.

As they look about the region, how can the ayatollahs be optimistic?

Syria, their major ally, wants to deal with the Americans to retrieve the Golan. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are hostile, with the latter having uncovered a Hezbollah plot against President Hosni Mubarak.

Hamas is laser-focused on Gaza, the West Bank and a Palestinian state, and showing interest in working with the Obama administration.

Where is the Islamic revolution going? Where is the state in the Muslim world that has embraced Islamism and created a successful nation?

Sudan? Taliban Afghanistan? Somalia is now in final passage from warlordism to Islamism. Does anyone believe the Al-Shahab will create a successful nation?

As for the ayatollahs, after 30 years, they are deep in crisis -- and what have they produced that the world admires?

Even if the "green revolution" in Iran triggers revolts in the Gulf states, Saudi Arabia or Egypt, can Iran believe Sunni revolutionary regimes will follow the lead of a Shia Islamic state? How long did it take Mao's China to renounce its elder brother in the faith, Khrushchev's Russia?

When one looks at the Asian tigers -- South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia -- or at the China or India of recent decades, one sees nations that impress the world with their progress.

Iran under the mullahs has gone sideways or backward. Now, with this suspect election and millions having shown their revulsion of the regime, the legitimacy and integrity of the ayatollahs have been called into question.

Obama offers the regime a way out.

They may exercise their right to peaceful nuclear power, have sanctions lifted and receive security guarantees, if they can prove they have no nuclear weapons program and will cease subverting through their Hezbollah-Hamas proxies the peace process Obama is pursuing between Israel and Palestine.

If Iran refuses Obama's offer, she will start down a road at the end of which are severe sanctions, escalation and a war that Obama does not want and Iran cannot want -- for the winner will not be Iran.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Pat Buchanan is a founding editor of The American Conservative magazine, and the author of many books including State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Pat Buchanan's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Sol_Invictus.
You sound like a good, old time Republican, like me.

where are all these moderate Mulims?
Persia has always ben an enigma in the Muslim world. Persia is not just a Arabic Muslim nation. It is Persia. It swings from being part of the Islamic world to being Persia again every generation.

Now about the rest of the Islamic world. There are not a bunch of moderate Muslims just waiting to work with Obama. The Islamic world is just seeing Obama's weakness and seeing it's chance to drive the Jews in to the sea. And Mr Buchanan probably wouldn't mind if that happen.

Not a Racist
I have been reading Pat's columns for quite some time. Although I don't always agree with him (I do agree with him 90% of the time), I don't see him as a racist. He has never said or implied that he is anti-immigration. He says that if someone wants to live here, then there is a proper procedure they have to go through. And for the record, Sowell's columns are always dead on in my opinion.

THE MULLAHS' UNSHAKABLE FAITH
Buchanan writes

"Given its monopoly of guns, bet on the Iranian regime. But, in the long run, the ayatollahs have to see the handwriting on the wall." He then asks the question: "As they look about the region, how can the ayatollahs be optimistic?"

To this I say the only writing that the mullahs see emblazoned on the wall are three glorious words: VICTORY OR DEATH! The very same words written there 30 years ago when Ayatollah Khomenie radicalized Iran under his evil rule. VICTORY OR DEATH! With death bringing the triumph of everlasting life in a blissful epicurean paradise.

To Buchanan's question about the mullahs keeping their faith in the face of grave challenges and dangers the answer is clear: they have the same unshakable faith that madly inspire suicide martyrs before they strike.




Iran
So much for gun control laws.

Buchanan wrote
"According to U.S. sources, Iran produced 6 million barrels of crude a day in 1974 under the shah. She has not been able to match that since the revolution."

Notice similarity to another historical event. Guess when the maximum grain production of 1991-area Soviet Union was. 1913--when it was Russian Empire under the czar! As the Bolsheviks failed to match the 1913 production in 74 years of their misrule, Iranian mullahs in 30 years of THEIR misrule have failed to match pre-1979 outputs.

I'm not exactly sure
what a mediawhore is. But my guess is if you were to look the phrase up in a dictionary, Obama's picture would be there.

And you might want to look up the word idiot as well, Sol-Invictus. I believe you would find your own photo rather than Sowell's.

NOT anti-immigration!!!
Just anti-ILLEGAL immigration. WHAT part of ILLEGAL can you not understand? We used to take in many thousands of Western Europeans until Ted the Swimmer played with immigration quotas. He WANTED a lot of Third World tripe coming in to swell the rabble dependent on Big Daddy Washington.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!!

Iran
Taiwan and South Korea also made most of its greatest economic progress under repressive military-based regimes, Hong Kong was a colony with the governor appointed by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the LegCo was mostly appointed by various constituencies (this didn't begin to change until the last governor, Chris Patten put forward changes in how the LegCo was elected). Singapore while a large degree of economic freedom has always been basically a one-party state ruled by the PAP.

Where Iran could go is follow China's path, that the Iranian leadership would maintain absolute political control, but basically in many other areas the government would be hands off. Some how, Iran's version of Islam I don't think would allow that.

After 1989 when the CCP dodged a large bullet, they speed up economic reforms and clamped down on corruption as a result, millions became rich and millions more entered the middle class. But China kept and continues to keep firm political control? Could Iran makes this deal too? I doubt it...unless there is an Iranian version of Deng Xiaoping (who began the Chinese reforms in 1978)or Jiang Zemin.

Wrat Wrangler
Pat isn't just anti-illegal immigration, but anti-immigration in general. And he is basically in my view a racist (or a best a bigot) and an anti-semite and a Hitler apologist. But if (and there is doubt Iran even wants the bomb) Iran gets the bomb, it won't be the end of the world, it won't be the end of Israel nor nuclear war. It will not be the best thing no doubt as Iran's neighbors will move to get their own weapons and it will spark an arms race, but it won't be the end of the world. Contray to thoughts of the Neo-cons, Iran is rational.

Sherwin
"I don't see him as a racist. He has never said or implied that he is anti-immigration."

Then you have not been paying attention.

He has called for an end to all immigration for 20 years, bemoans the increase of non-white immigration since the 1965 reforms (which eliminated what was left of the race-based immigration policies that were established by the racist 1924 National Origins Act), and blames the decline of the GOP on non-white immigration. He is not just anti-illegal immigration (which is a valid position) but against all immigration (unless they are white Europeans I guess and not too many of those left to immigrate or willing to immigrate).

Joel
"When Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it WILL use them on Israel, and will try to nuke us as well."

Total BS. Iran is rational. It helped the US in Afghanistan (as it served its interests) and opposed it in Iraq (again, that in its interest). The leaders in Iran have been spirting away funds into Swiss bank accounts in the belief of oncoming sanctions (hardly the act of a regime seeing the world about to end).

Israel has a nuclear stockpile as large as the PRC's to Iran's stockpile of...drum roll please...ZERO. Even IF Iran have a small stockpile it would not attack Israel as it knows what the response would be and yes, that do care. Iran's leadership goals are the same as the leadership in the DPRK--survive and attacking Israel is not going to accomplish that goal.

Would Iran love to see Israel get wiped off the face of the earth tomorrow. Sure. Is it going to do anything to try to make that happen and invite its own destruction? No.

Now go back to your fantasies of killing all Muslim men and taking their women as war prizes.

It Is OUR White House

Obama only lives there.

The daily press conference, basically, called out Obama on his spending, borrowing, health care, foreign policy, tax spending, arrogance and more. It was not pretty.

When Obama knocks the Far Left reporter Chuck Todd for INSUBORDINANCE, then you know that the bloom is off of rose.

Maine is passing an across the board tax cut.

Vermont wants to secede.

Obama is not a King, but he does know IRE.

Ouck Obama

Akagi

Many of the people of Iran, but many of the Mullahs are not. The same goes for the people and Lil' Kim of North Korea.

Akagi:
Where on earth did you get the idea that Iran is rational?

Iran has never been rational. Not when they want to exterminate an entire race. Not when they consider themselves one of the most powerful nations on earth. They can sometimes act in a rational manner - if it is in their best interests - but rationality is not their forte.

Iran looking ahead
The younger people of Iran are certainly looking ahead. It is what young people do when they want to establish themselves and support the families they hope to have.

But the mullahs and ayatollahs are for the most part old people. They don't really care what might be best for Iran. They want to insure their place in Paradise - and what better way to do that than to blast all their enemies and die in a blaze of glory when their enemies retaliate? As long as they can retain control of power until they die, either by natural death or by being killed, they don't care what happens to the rest of the population.

You can't deal with someone who prefers to die to go to Paradise more than he prefers to aid his country or people.

Akagi

It must sake to be you.

Actually, you and Hal Donahue could drink yourselves into a stupor.


For the record, I am a fiscally-conservative Constitutionalist without party affiliation.

To some point Akagi:
I have met a lot of Iranians (the sane ones identify as Persian). Most of their populace was born AFTER the "Islamic Revolution", about 66% in fact. They have NO knowledge or even interest in the fact that the Shah was installed in a coup in 1953.

The mullahs STILL live in 1953 and THAT'S the problem. Like race hustlers in America who still live in 1920-60 America they can't see anything but their personal bogeymen.

Look at the protestes. Most are under 30 and are waving signs in ENGLISH to get our attention.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!

Well?
Whom do you stand with?

I say WE ARE ALL IRANIANS TODAY!!!!! True, if the public gets their way they may elect a guy who's not very friendly to the U.S. but at the same time it would be hard to find some clown who hates us more.

Either way LET THE IRANIAN PEOPLE DECIDE!!! THAT is what so many of us fought and died for even IF it doesn't fully serve our interests in the short run. ANYTHING that advances liberty in the world ultimately DOES serve our interests.

The Left always whined about the cruel and brutal Savak under the Shah. What about the thugs shooting 16 year old girls in the head and cutting the throats of male college students? 66% of the Iranian people were born AFTER the "Islamic Revolution" and have NO memory of the Shah but are daily targets for the abuses of the mullahs.

-Ray

WARNING!
Conservatives: Everything you say will be taken down by a biased media and misquoted against you out of context in a kangaroo court of public opinion. You have been warned.

Wrat Wrangler
"I say WE ARE ALL IRANIANS TODAY!!!!"

gee wiz, just last month were you not saying we should turn Iran into a 'sea of glass?'

If the LEADERS want to nuke Israel
We will have NO choice. There was NO choice in Japan. They were preparing 30 MILLION civilians to die for the Emperor and we would lose at least 500,000 men and the Japanese at least a MILLION. More people died in the firebombing of Tokyo than in BOTH A-bomb attacks combined.

The Japanese PEOPLE in fact SUPPORTED and ENDORSED the atrocities against the Chinese in Nanking and other places. This took all the fight out of them. Tehran is one city Iran can afford to lose if the mad mullahs go nuke. We have nukes NOT to use but they are desperate to use theirs.

The young generation in Iran is NOT rabidly anti-U.S.!! That's the old cadavers who still live in 1953.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!
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.