Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Justification for War?

Cox and Forkum once again hit the nail on the head.

To be pendantic for some readers out there who do not know the history of the Iranian Islamic Republic I will start at the beginning. From its creation after the Shah fled, the United States has had cause to go to war with Iran because it was Iranians who invaded the US Embassy in Tehran, in violation of numerous quaint European notions enshrined as law. That was grounds for war. But President Carter screwed up his one chance to save the hostages and for almost a year sat there impotent. Then when President Ronald Wilson Reagan was sworn in, the mad Iranian mullahs quickly hustled the embassy staff on a plane out of the country just in case Reagan would attack Iran to rescue the hostages. Then Iran got busy supporting various terrorist groups like Hizbollah in Lebanon which kidnapped American citizens or blowing up 241 American Marines. Reagan sensing he did not really undestand what was going on in the Syrian controlled satrapy called Lebanon pulled US forces out which sent the wrong message to the mad mullahs. So Reagan focused on defeating the Evil Empire as Iran got embroiled in eight years of hell with Iraq. Then once the Evil Empire collapsed, Hussein of Iraq invade that tiny country called Kuwait; so the US with allies had to evict the murdering tyrant while Iran simmered in the background with occasional blips of notoriety like USS Vincennes shooting down that Iranian jetliner or terrorists in speed boats operating from Iranian oil facilities attacking oil tankers during the Iran-Iraq War.

The laundry list of causes is long and I covered only some of them, it just has been Iran's depraved luck that other things have distracted the world from paying very much attention to them.


Myrtus said...

Anna, it's good to see your perspective on this, it helps shed light on the subject for me as far as the the American Marines that got killed. My roommate was stationed in Lebabon at the time and he's still pissed off at Reagan. Almost everyone in his unit got killed, only he and seven others survived and he still feels guilty about that. He told me that Reagan is to blame because he insisted that they should be an unarmed peacekeeping unit in an extremely hostile area. Had they been armed, this would have never happened.

Anna said...

Myrtus, found some links you might like looking into.




It is easy to blame Reagan since it was his vision of helping foster peace in stricken Lebanon that lead to the disaster. Reading Kelly's essay it seems Washington suffered myopia in regards to the real situation in Lebanon. He also provides a lot of background of other Middle East events that tied in. I hope your friend comes to grips with his survivor guilt.

If the Marines had been armed, possibly. Actually probably since the Beirut embassy had already been attacked six months prior. Though better barricades would have helped a lot by keeping the delivery truck kamikaze out of the freaking lobby. Whomever did not fortify the compound bears responsibility also.

Mike's America said...

Iran didn't just support the terrorist groups you mention. They pretty much created them.

They've been at war with us since they took the embassy.

Ignoring that fact isn't making us safer.

Anna said...

Well at last Iran is getting the attention those tyrannical murdering thugs deserve. Just hope it is not too late to prevent massive bloodshed.

Mike, you do know how Iran financed all these acts of terror right? Not only oil sales have floated it but counterfeit $100USD bills printed on off-set itaglio presses Carter allowed to be sold to the Shah just before Carter talked the Shah into leaving.

Follow the bloody trail and it all goes back to Carter.