Navigation
-
Recent Posts
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
Tag Archives: iran
Avoiding Needless Wars, Part 3: Are We About to Repeat the Mistakes of Vietnam?
In August of 1964 Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, giving President Johnson a blank check to escalate the war in Vietnam. Two alleged acts of North Vietnamese unprovoked aggression were the basis for that resolution. But, as detailed in Part 1 of this series, their first attack was in response to covert American attacks on North Vietnam, and as detailed in Part 2 the second attack never occurred. This third installment in the series draws on additional formerly classified information to extend those arguments, and concludes by warning of might become a kind of “Iran War Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.” Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, iran, martin hellman, needless wars, nuclear risk, Senate Resolution 65, stanford, Vietnam, war and peace
5 Comments
Reagan Adviser Critiques Iraq War
Wow! Ronald Reagan’s former Ambassador to Moscow doesn’t blog very often, but has had two real zingers in the last two days. His newest post “Did We Really Win in Iraq?” starts off by saying … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged critical thinking, iran, iraq war, Jack Matlock, martin hellman, stanford, war and peace
1 Comment
How Not to Negotiate With Iran
If we want diplomacy to have a chance of avoiding a war over Iran’s nuclear program, we need to pay greater attention to what Paul Pillar, a 28-year veteran of the CIA and now at Georgetown University, is saying: Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged iran, martin hellman, Paul Pillar, stanford, Trita Parsi, war and peace
2 Comments
Ex-Spymaster on Iranian Nuclear Threat
In a recent interview, retired four-star admiral and former head of the super-secret NSA, Adm. Bobby Inman, portrays a very different Iranian threat from the usual – and a very different approach for dealing with Iran successfully. Continue reading
Why Do the Terrorists Hate Us?
Speaking before a Joint Session of Congress nine days the 9/11 attacks, President Bush asked, “Why do they hate us?” and answered that “They hate our freedoms – our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged afghanistan, Hellman, iran, iraq, Lebanon, nuclear risk, pakistan, stanford, terrorism, terrorist motivation
Leave a comment
Ghost of Jackson-Vanik Alive and Well in Moscow
As noted in a previous post on this blog, the 1974 Jackson-Vanik Amendment haunts Russian-American relations. Designed to punish the Soviet Union for its lack of free emigration, it still applies to Russia even though that nation has relatively liberal emigration policies. While no longer needed, keeping it on the books hurts us in many ways. Most notably, for reasons explained in that earlier post, it hampers our nuclear nonproliferation efforts relative to Iran. Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged cold war, iran, Jackson-Vanik, nuclear proliferation, russia
4 Comments
Two Takes on Attacking Iran
The current issue of The Atlantic magazine has an article by Jeffrey Goldberg which argues that an Israeli military strike against Iran is the most likely outcome of the current standoff over Tehran’s nuclear program. The article describes a nuclear armed Iran as an existential threat that Israel cannot allow to come into existence. While Iran’s rantings lend credence to that viewpoint, I found a retort by Iranian exile Trita Parsi also to have value. As is often the case in complex international disputes, each viewpoint has some valid points and a synthesis of the two provides a better perspective than either one alone. I encourage you to read both articles and include key excerpts from each one as motivation. First from Goldberg: Continue reading
