Carol Platt Liebau: The Price of Unity

Wednesday, June 07, 2006

The Price of Unity

Over at Bull Moose, Marshall Wittmann is accusing the President of having essentially sold out to the Iranians.

And I grant you that reading the terms of the offer made to Tehran is enough to make one queasy. I'll further stipulate that if John Kerry had offered the same deal, I'd be very, very alarmed.

The reason that I'm willing to give the Bush Administration the benefit of the doubt, however, is because of their history. Unlike the Democrats, I've seen no evidence that the Bush Administration either doesn't understand the terrorist threat or isn't taking it seriously. The same goes for the possibility of a nuclear Iran.

Just as only Nixon could go to China, the left in the US would forgive Kerry if he had decided to ignore the UN and deal with Iran on the US's own terms (not that he ever would have). But if President Bush does the same thing, he'll be portrayed as a "warmonger," just as he was when he took it upon himself with the "coalition of the willing" to enforce the UN resolutions that the UN itself refused to take seriously.

And so President Bush is working with other countries -- maybe to stop Iran, maybe simply to show them that Iran doesn't intend to be stopped no matter what the US offers. Couldn't he be playing a page from the playbook inadvertantly written by Ehud Barak in his 2000 negotiations with Yasser Arafat?

6 Comments:

Blogger Dr Faust said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10:25 AM  
Blogger RovingWireTap said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11:10 AM  
Blogger wrabkin said...

Right. Just like when William Jefferson gets caught taking a bribe, it's corruption. When Bob Ney does, it's patriotrism!

12:56 PM  
Blogger jeankelly said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

4:56 PM  
Blogger Orphan in Bama said...

It's window dressing.

david

6:27 PM  
Blogger amber said...

You are all a little crazy. Carol does not sound all excited about this deal. She is giving Bush the benefit of the doubt that he earned by keeping our country safe and attack free since 911. I wonder if President Bush is not doing this so we will be able to plant someone over there. Iran will develope a nuke, we need to keep our enemies close. They were working on this long before we went into Iraq, long before the first time we went into Iraq (search articles on Israel blowing up their progress). What I do not understand about liberals is why they want us to send troops to Darfur, but we can not liberate the people in Iraq? I don't get it. I agree with this war, with every part of who I am I agree with this war. I never agreed with our reasons to invide Iraq the first time around, though. I would have agreed, but I thought the precept was wrong. To protect Kuwait? Kuwait was stealing form Iraq, Iraq had good justification for invading Kuwait. Now, if we had gone in because of human rights violations or because there was a severe threat to us, more than monetary, I would agree. I had family in that war too.

Again, I will say it is bad manners to insult the owner of this blog, this is not CNN.com, this is a personal web log that does not advertise. It is bad manners to insult someone in their own home, someone who invited you.

8:05 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google