Christopher Hitchens argues in Slate that Obama must talk to the Iranians. But which Iranians? He suggests the Iranian people, not all of whom support Ahmedinejad. This sounds fabulous in theory. And in practice?
The idea of direct and transparent negotiations with the Iranians is not wrong in principle, but it depends on which Iranians are the actual or potential partners. The president can address the Iranian people directly if he chooses, from the podium of the United Nations ...Perhaps not quite as good. I'm not sure if Iranians get to visit the UN all that often. Still, hopefully anything Obama says at the UN might make its way to popular media in Iran. And it's a good thing Washington has moved beyond just parrotting imbecilic phrases like "the Axis of Evil".
Hitchens also makes this observation:
For decades, we have wondered what might happen when or if an apocalyptic weapon came into the hands of a messianic group or irrational regime. We are surely now quite close to finding out.Maybe Hitchens was asleep when Mordechai Vanunu spilled the beans.
UPDATE I: Neo-Nazi blogger Sheik Yer'Mami, whose racist comments (under the name of "Red Baron") frequently appear on Tim Blair's blog, is rather upset with my mentioning what LGF has to say about serial extremist Robert Spencer. SYM/RB is also upset with lots of other people. He's upset with US President Barack Obama (whom he refers to as "The Magic Negro" and "My Muslim President Obama") and David "Britain's dumbest Jew" Milibrand. Like I said - he's Tim Blair's buddy ...
Words © 2009 Irfan Yusuf
Bookmark this on Delicious