An article by Joel Mowbray today, expressing an opinion on the state department he's expressed before and that I've commented on before--so stop me if you've read this before.
He is writing about some student demonstrations held in Iran, and, more to the point, how lousy our State Department is for continuing to talk with the government of Iran.
Here are the standard points
-- President Bush is the President of the United States and he has the power to control the State Department if he wants to. He can remove Colin Powell should that be his wish, and he can put a stop to these meetings. He has chosen not to. I know you want to, Mr. Mowbray, but you cannot attack the State Department without also attacking our beloved President.
-- You state, “Engaging” leaders in any way is a tacit acknowledgement of legitimacy, particularly when their very basis for rule is being challenged from within." This is patent nonsense, and would basically eliminate the need for a state department, except in so far as they can round up support for the next country our military is going to invade. It commits us to a policy of war with all countries who we disagree with, as any discussions with them would lend legitimacy to their Government.
-- What about the 9,000 pound gorilla in the room? Isn't there a nation we don't really agree with that has nuclear weapons and a similar size army to the United States and internal dissent? Somewhere in Eastern Asia? What do you propose we do about the Chinese, if we are not going to engage them?
Mr. Mowbray might be willing to throw away the lives of American soldiers in a mad effort to deny "legitimacy" to the mullahs of Iran, but perhaps President Bush feels differently. I know I do.
No comments:
Post a Comment