Carry A Big Stick
Unfortunately it seems that the Islamic Republic of Iran is the one carrying the big stick, and they haven't been speaking softly. Whereas it is the United States that seems committed, under the Obama administration, to speaking softly, trusting that the big stick will not be lowered too precipitously and too harshly. There is always the example of North Korea whom the international community also wished to keep from acquiring nuclear weapons.
It is the stuff of which nightmares are made, actually. The most politically, socially, ideologically, religiously unstable regions and nations of the world having acquired the ultimate weapon of mass destruction. Pakistan most certainly qualifies in spades, and thanks to Pakistan, North Korea and now Iran. Iraq's attempts failed, as did Libya's and Syria's, and they failed for the most part, thanks to one little nation denying them their goals.
It is the big nation who sets itself forward as the ultimate authority, arbiter and command post of integrity and security on the world stage that marches off to war when it deems that to do so is required to maintain its reputation for stalwart resourcefulness in responding to world threats, but in the process its intelligence leads it astray. And then, there is the issue of a president who believes his rational judgement is shared universally.
He is not convinced by what he has experienced, that those who exude the very essence of evil intent would ever pursue that avowed intention to a conclusion. Even when those very same sinister heads of state clearly and in the most unequivocal manner on the public stage bellicosely threaten to commit to atrocities. Patience is the virtue that American President Barack Obama cautions.
Wait and see what transpires. And if that wait results in the misfortune of an utter catastrophe on a scale that can barely be contemplated, why then, react. The loose talk of war, on the other hand, attributed to those who fear the outcome of Iran's nuclear arms achievement on the brink of real time, is simply a response to the Islamic Republic's own talk of war; not loose, but precise and determined.
Two men meeting whose nations share much in common; one the master of the universe, the other a supplicant. The small nation heavily dependent on the goodwill and promises of the superpower. It is the small nation that is immediately threatened, a threat extended to other nations in the geography it shares. Should the situation evolve as a real-time irremediable disaster, be assured little nation, there will be an appropriate response.
Late, perhaps, to serve your purpose of continued existence, but a response, withal. To which the little nation responds that it will serve its own interest. Taking a great leap into the unknown to do so. Is there any other reasonable option?
It is the stuff of which nightmares are made, actually. The most politically, socially, ideologically, religiously unstable regions and nations of the world having acquired the ultimate weapon of mass destruction. Pakistan most certainly qualifies in spades, and thanks to Pakistan, North Korea and now Iran. Iraq's attempts failed, as did Libya's and Syria's, and they failed for the most part, thanks to one little nation denying them their goals.
It is the big nation who sets itself forward as the ultimate authority, arbiter and command post of integrity and security on the world stage that marches off to war when it deems that to do so is required to maintain its reputation for stalwart resourcefulness in responding to world threats, but in the process its intelligence leads it astray. And then, there is the issue of a president who believes his rational judgement is shared universally.
He is not convinced by what he has experienced, that those who exude the very essence of evil intent would ever pursue that avowed intention to a conclusion. Even when those very same sinister heads of state clearly and in the most unequivocal manner on the public stage bellicosely threaten to commit to atrocities. Patience is the virtue that American President Barack Obama cautions.
Wait and see what transpires. And if that wait results in the misfortune of an utter catastrophe on a scale that can barely be contemplated, why then, react. The loose talk of war, on the other hand, attributed to those who fear the outcome of Iran's nuclear arms achievement on the brink of real time, is simply a response to the Islamic Republic's own talk of war; not loose, but precise and determined.
Two men meeting whose nations share much in common; one the master of the universe, the other a supplicant. The small nation heavily dependent on the goodwill and promises of the superpower. It is the small nation that is immediately threatened, a threat extended to other nations in the geography it shares. Should the situation evolve as a real-time irremediable disaster, be assured little nation, there will be an appropriate response.
Late, perhaps, to serve your purpose of continued existence, but a response, withal. To which the little nation responds that it will serve its own interest. Taking a great leap into the unknown to do so. Is there any other reasonable option?
Labels: Conflict, Crisis Politics, Iran, Israel, Technology, United States
posted by Pieface | 7:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home