The newly launched Al Jazeera English version has posted up an article on their website that claims the west needs Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran, not the other way around. I think that position rises or falls on one crucial question...does America want to continue being Politically Correct, or do we want to take the gloves off, and do whatever it takes to seize victory from defeat in Iraq, and to once and for all end Iran's march towards having nuclear weapons. If America, our leaders, our military generals shrug off the cloak of restraint that is Political Correctness, and instead fight to win at all costs, settling for nothing less than full and complete surrender, then Iran is nothing if but a nuisance.We here in America are now hearing a call to re implement the draft...now, the facts are simple. We are in a police action similar to Vietnam over in Iraq. Short of doubling, even tripling the number of troops in theatre in Iraq, and going back into a war footing, that war cannot be won. The militias of Iraq have to be defeated, there must be a full surrender, renegade want to be leaders like Sadr either killed or captured. Short of a draft, where does the Pentagon propose finding the troops necessary for such an action? In World War II we had a Marshall plan, and even today we still have troops on the ground in Japan and Germany. We were victorious because we really did use overwhelming force, including the dropping of THE BOMB. We either bring our troops home in Iraq, or we take the gloves off, stop worrying about world opinion, and do whatever it takes to be Victorious...there is no middle ground.
Iran...SANCTIONS WILL NOT WORK, and it is that simple, we have seen it time and again. What will work? Our nukes. OH MY GAWD, that's politically incorrect! Oh, and the devastation visited upon civilized society by various assorted terrorist groups funded by Iran, what is that? If strategic pin point bombing took out the city of Tehran, how long do you think the people would want to fight? They would not fight, they would have poked the tiger once to often and paid the price...you see, having the greatest military in the world only means something if you use it, and you use it well. Once the fear of that force is gone, you have lost your advantage. Bush has pushed us dangerously close to having NOTHING.
So, do we need Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? If we stay the course of Political Correctness, yes we do. However, if we are going to stop worrying about what others think, and instead play to win, he becomes nothing, a bug waiting to be stomped on. So Bush, what's it going to be?
Why the West needs Ahmadinejad
By Rageh Omaar in Tehran
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/257DD78A-63A7-4427-A444-262D0FD9F6C7.htm
A year is a long time in Iranian politics. Twelve months ago, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, was branded a hardliner by Washington - a religious zealot, and a direct threat to Israel.
Now he is seen as essential to helping George Bush and Tony Blair out of the policy disaster in Iraq.
What is it about him and his government that the American president and British prime minister got so wrong?
Austere leader
Ahmedinejad lectured at a prestigious university in Tehran, teaching civil engineering.
He is still technically a member of the faculty. His office remains untouched, should he wish to return.
You would know that it was Dr Ahmadinejad's office only by its austerity and religious symbols.
Students and colleagues, even those who do not agree with his politics, say they respect him.
Ahmadinejad represents a crucial break in Iranian politics – he is the first post-revolutionary who is not a cleric, he fought in the Iran-Iraq war, and crucially he is seen as not being corrupt.
If the West has underestimated his government's influence in Iraq and the region, they have also exaggerated his vulnerability here in Iran.
So it is hardly surprising that most ordinary Iranians are not hugely interested in Tony Blair's comments on Iraq, especially as he has said Iran would have to give up its nuclear enrichment programme before any talks – something every Iranian leader has said will not happen.
People here feel that when it comes to Iraq and even Lebanon and Afghanistan, Britain and the US need them, not the other way round.
What they want to know is what benefits does Iran get for such assistance?
