Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Donald Duck ambushes Bill Frist in Warsaw

Three Republican senators were in Warsaw his week. They came to talk about visas. They ended up talking about Iran and how the US has no plans to fry Tehran.

Poles think that Poland should not be on the list of countries that need a visa to get into the United States. It’s a very sensitive issue with the US’s ‘best friend’ in Europe (apart from the good old Brits, of course – who don’t need a visa).

Three Republicans – US Senate majority leader, Bill Frist (photo), and Senators Gregg and Richard Burr of North Carolina - swooped on Warsaw this week to work some PR on the issue and meet with President Lech Kaczynski.

But Seymour Hersh had just gone and published his article claiming that Bush is refusing to rule out a nuclear strike on Iran. The senators didn’t like it.
"America has many characters. We have Donald Duck and Seymour Hersh and they're approximately in the same category," Gregg said at a press conference here. "And I give them the same credibility."

Ooo, you bitch!

In February, the Poles thought the Iranian government was joking when it said that it wanted to send a team to Auschwitz to uncover for themselves the real ‘truth’ about the Holocaust. That came a few weeks after the president of Iran had another one of his populist fits (and firming up his support base) and started the now usual rant about Israel.

We should have just ignored the idiot.

Instead we are turning up the heat. I don’t think it’s really about nuclear weapons or even Iran having nuclear weapons. It’s about this Iran having nuclear weapons.

So, ultimately, the goal has to be regime change.

And how they going to go about that, then?


sonia said...

I am all for regime change in Iran. But unlike Iraq, where there were no elections and therefore war was the only option, I think the US should just turn up the pressure on Teheran and wait until Iranians themselves kick their Holocaust-denying nutcase of a president from office...

sonia said...

As for sending an Iranian team to Auschwitz, that's a terrific idea. "It's here, behind that door... Whoops, sorry! No, I can't open it, let me find the keys.... Let's see if that gas chamber still works...."

michael farris said...

Beatroot, you're letting the Americans gaslight you.

The issue isn't visa-free travel, almost all Poles agree that isn't liable (and many understand why, though I think that being in the EU has taken a lot of that pressure off the US).

The Polish side is doing standard negotiation, asking for more than they expect, and waiting for a counter offer.

Instead, the Americans have mostly acted as if there is no middle ground between visa-free travel and the current humiliating scenario (waste a day or two and pay a lot of money to be treated as a criminal/child and told you can't get a visa). And it's worked.

(And almost everyone ignores the inconvenient fact that the US visa program here is a profit-making proposition, when is the US going to back away from making money for the principle of the thing?)

It could be, of course, that the Polish side realizes this and is playing along for reasons of its own.

The quickest way to get the US to change their visa policy would be a boycott for all but emergency travel. Having that revenue stream dry up would serve as excellent motivation to try to salvage the money flow.

beatroot said...

But of course, Mike, the US is actually going in the opposite direction on immigration and visa control. In the future everone who wants to go there is gonna have to give a sperm sanple and have a picture taken of the inside of their brain before they can get in to the country (biometrics).

Sonia - If I were the Poles I would have welcomed Iran to come and have a look. They could do the death camp tourist trail here (lots of camps, not just Auschwitz). David Irving, once he gets out of his jail in Austria, could be their tour guide. "And on the left we have where they kept all the shoes...".

And I would like a regime change in Tehran too. But instead of turning up the diplomatic heat (what can they do? ban Iranian politicians getting a US visa?) I would trade with these people, help build up the economy and the middle class, and then let them deal with the bastards.

But, sadly, our magnificent leaders are not that bright. They will get nastier and nastier and play into the hands of the Iranian conservatives and nationalists.

roman said...

I am sure that Isreal's nuclear arsenal is being "dusted off" and their guidance chips are being re-adjusted every time Ahmadinejad opens his mouth. How a diplomatically incompetent fool like that is left to represent a nation in this day and age is beyond my comprehension.
I don't think the average Iranian citizen really appreciates the mortal danger that they are in. I totally agree, dark clouds on the horizon unless there is regime change soon.

sonia said...

I don't know how to deal with him, but I'm very scared of him. Experts telling me it's all just grandstanding don't reassure me. What do we do?

We have three options, and none of them are pretty:

1. Do nothing (West's prefered option), except UN resolutions and inspectors. Fortiunately, Iran's intransigence makes that option more and more difficult.

2. We attack Iran. It will make Iraq's War and occupation look like a picnic it actually was....

3. We assassinate Ahmadinejad and his allies in a Munich kind of operation...

My option would be number 3...

beatroot said...

Sonia! Bumping off an elected politician - he won an election that nobody has contested as being unfaur - would be an international crime much worse than anything that he has done (which at the moment amounts to nothing much at all).

George - He believes nukes are a part of Allah's plan to bring this about. And soon he'll have them.

This is not true. I don't know what allah would say about this but Iran will not have nuclear weapons anytime soon. They have (they claim) manfufactored some uranium. But this, if true, is nowhere near the quality needed for a bomb. They are, by most estimates, about ten years away from getting the capacity to produce weapons grade uranium.

There is also little evidence that they intend to make a bomb. This is a fantasy.

There is support in the country to produce nuclear energy.

And some in the regime have said that would like nukes - but no evidence that they are trying to get enough centrifuges to produce one.

Iran is surrounded by two countries, Afghanistan and Iraq, which have been invaded and are occupied by the US/UK moron alliance. They are surrounded by countries in the region that already have nuclear weapons. Pakistan, India, Isreal...(three countries which refuse to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and have received nothing but support from the US).

So it's little suprise that there might be some support for nukes within Iran.

It is the hypocracy of the West that has created this situation.

And Bush can do nothing about this...except try and look tough to distract attention from his other military disasters.

Frank Partisan said...

Assasination can only bring into power the next mullah in line.

I don't think I'm the only one, who when thinking about Washington's Iran policy, is the word delusional.

The Iranian's see how the gift of democracy is presenting in Iraq, I think they have second thoughts.

beatroot said...

I really think you have nothing to be scared of from the Iranian government. And besides, there is nothing we can do about them.

We can do quite a lot with our governments, however.

Bush is using this business to deflect from the problems he has got himself in at home. The 'axis of evil' speech he made a few years ago suprised everyone - including many in Washington. This was when Iran had a more moderate government and before your Iranian bogeyman was in power, George.

He is using Iran as a scapegoat. They are not a threat to anyone but the people of Iran. And Iranians themselves are the only ones who any right to get rid of their own government.

beatroot said...

That's right, Romerican. Everybody is Bush's best friend.

George - sorry, I didn't mean to imply that the whole thing is a lie by Bush. He really does believe what he says - he is not a liar (at least, no kore than the usual politician at 'war time'). But the need to be seen to be doing something is his strongest motive. Not some neo-con masterplan. Bish doesn't have a materplan about anything at all. He is a day-to-day surviver now.