Here is the beginning of Saturday's main
editorial in the Washington Post:
Why Iran Wants to Talk
Saturday, March 18, 2006; Page A20
IT'S EASY to see the potential advantage to Iran of opening negotiations with the United States on Iraq. The sudden announcement by Iran's national security chief Thursday that Tehran would accept an offer of dialogue made months ago by the U.S. ambassador in Baghdad came as members of the U.N. Security Council were meeting to discuss a council statement about the Iranian nuclear program.
That statement could be the first in an escalating series of steps to force Tehran to give up the enrichment of uranium and fully cooperate with international inspectors. Preventing such diplomatic action has been Iran's main aim since its illegal nuclear program was discovered in 2004; the failure to stop the issue from reaching the Security Council has prompted some visible handwringing and backbiting among the mullahs.
By drawing the Bush administration into talks about Iraq, the Iranians give themselves a shot at splintering or distracting the fragile coalition that may be forming in New York. Already Iranian officials are speaking openly about the possibility that any discussions would expand into the broader security dialogue that Tehran has long coveted with the United States. In Iraq -- where American soldiers are dying from Iranian-supplied roadside bombs and sectarian violence by Iranian-supported militias is steadily mounting -- the Islamic regime has a tacit and sinister offer to make: Back down in New York, and the carnage in Baghdad might just drop off. Even the appearance that the Bush administration might be considering such a trade-off would worsen the situation in Iraq and wreck a year of careful and mostly effective anti-proliferation diplomacy.
I'm not sure where to begin. There is so much bullshit in this Washington Post Editorial that it's like trying to clear the Augean Stables.
Here is part of a pentagon press conference this past week.
Q[reporter]: Are you seeing weapons, Iranian-backed weapons, coming into Iraq, sir? Are U.S. forces engaging these Iranian elements? Do you consider them to be enemy forces, red forces, essentially? What do you see happening here?
GEN. PACE: There have been some IEDs and some weapons that we believe are traceable back to Iran.
Q: Well, there was one shipment that was -- (off mike) -- last year that you have talked about. Are you seeing more recent shipments of Iranian -- of weapons you believe manufactured in Iran and shipped across the border?
GEN. PACE: The most recent reports have to do with individuals crossing the border into Iraq.
Q: Do you believe it's backed by the government, or are they individual elements not backed by the central government?
GEN. PACE: I do not know.
So we don't know if the Iranian government has anything to do with the IEDs. So, Washington Post, I call bullshit. Ah, but more to the point: Moving on . . .
Let's repeat a sentence from the editorial . . . a serious contender for the award for The Most Disingenuous Sentence of All Time:
In Iraq -- where American soldiers are dying from Iranian-supplied roadside bombs and sectarian violence by Iranian-supported militias is steadily mounting -- the Islamic regime has a tacit and sinister offer to make: Back down in New York, and the carnage in Baghdad might just drop off.
Well, as we saw above, we don't know if the Iranian government has anything to do with IEDs. But let's just assume they do. Okay? Just for the fun of it. "American soldiers are dying from Iranian-supplied bombs". Uh-huh. Thanks for the update, Washington Post. But let's remember something: American Soldiers are Dying Because Bush Won't Let Them Come Home.
It's sooooo awful for Iran to defend its Shi'ite neighbors. How dare they. This was totally unexpected and we ought to be sooooo mad at them.
God, what HORSESHIT. Washington Post, tell me why we are forcing our men and women into this life-threatening situation and then I will tell you if Iran is SOOOOO EVIL for defending the exact thing we would expect them to defend.
There's a whole lot more total bullshit in that editorial, but I'd rather let it get sorted out in the comments. I don't like boring people with long diaries. (You can also call bullshit on me if you want to.)