Archive for the ‘Iran’ Category

Blair – A Man of Honour

May 18, 2007

While many in the UK have been quick to criticize outgoing PM Tony Blair for taking the country into the Iraq war, many people outside the UK have held him in high esteem as one of the few truly great world leaders.

Eloquent and lucid, Blair rarely left questioners with any doubts about his views or his motives. He has a quality few politicians seem to possess – an ability to tackle the most awkward of questions posed by those out to trip him with consummate ease and confidence. Despite their close working relationship, this does not seem to have rubbed off on President Bush.

There are a large number of people, seemingly influenced by the mainstream media and the anti-war mob, who appear to believe that Blair’s legacy will be one of failure in Iraq and of being America’s little lapdog. How shortsighted these people are!

Blair has had a very clear, independent line of thought with regard to foreign policy for many years and certainly one which predates his relationship with President Bush. He has been motivated to bring about change in the world particularly where oppression is rife through direct intervention. He has had the courage to use military intervention where necessary with some success.

Tony Blair has had the foresight to realize that there is a threat to the free world from extremist Muslims and has not been afraid to act upon this threat. 9/11 was an obvious example of the danger facing the democratic countries and it was not hard for Blair to suport the US in this time of crisis. Blair, however, saw (and still sees) the bigger picture; thus, he remained loyal to the US in its ongoing war on terror unlike many other countries (eg Spain, which caved in to the Al Qaeda threats).

Britain should stand shoulder to shoulder with America after September the 11th. I have never deviated from that view, I do not regret that view,” said Blair at this week’s sunnit with President Bush. Blair’s loyalty is inspiring and sends a shiver down one’s spine at a time when many of the candidates in the race to be the next President are running for the hills and ready to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists – John McCain being the main exception to this in that he is committed to continuing the fight against extremists in Iraq and beyond.

Blair has no regrets when he considers the reasons for remaining America’s most loyal and trusted ally. He has acted in the interests of his country and the rest of the world and so cannot logically cannot have regrets. His statement that he would do the same again must really grate with the anti-war/anti-UK/anti-America rabble, while at the same time continue to offer hope to those of us who believe that the world must continue to stand up in the face of terror and defend its freedom against those who wish to dominate through oppression and devastation.

Let us hope Gordon Brown is big enough to fill Blair’s shoes and to value the future of the West above his own career. Blair and Bush have been examples of politicians not afraid to go against public opinion for the greater good. The world needs more leaders like them. This is contrary to what the mainstream media and many would have you believe, but, then again, these naysayers are the type of people who would have surrendered to Hitler following the debacle at Dunkirk, or countless other ‘negative’ moments during WWII.

Great leaders are not necessarily the most popular leaders during their time at the top. They often become popular as the historians and the population, in general, judge them in hindsight. Blair will be seen as one of the truly great Prime Ministers of the UK and leaders of the world. Who knows, he may even continue to wield great influence in his efforts as an ex-PM around the globe.

The world should be thankful that he enabled the US to take on the threat of the Islamic extremists with its historic ally standing firm alongside, while most of the rest of the major democratic countries stood back and shirked their responsibility.


Pelosi Panders to the Syrians – Resignation Next?

April 5, 2007

Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker, led the Democrats to a new low this week when she visited Syria and offered an alternative to President Bush’s foreign policy.

Bush’s policy includes taking the fight to the terrorists, punishing nations who harbour or support terrorism, and offering a hand of support to those who stand up against totalitarian regimes. It is hard to imagine anyone could be so vehemently opposed to these ideas – then, one remembers that many in the Democratic Party are more concerned about their own short-term political careers than the security of the US and the world at large.

Pelosi’s jaunt to Syria is designed to undermine Bush and the war on terror. Is she so myopic that she fails to see the encouragement she is giving to the self-proclaimed enemies of the US and Israel? Is she blind to the religious, personal, and political restrictions placed on citizens of Syria?

She seems to prefer to negotiate with Assad rather than work with Bush. Wearing the headscarf hardly strengthens the position of women in a country where gender equality is guaranteed by law but is not a reality for many women (Human Rights Watch).

The US is at war with the Islamic extremists. Syria supports the terrorist groups who are attacking Coalition forces and who are undermining democracy in Iraq. Pelosi is irresponsible, at the very least, and verging on treasonous, at the very worst.

Pelosi has emboldened the enemy through her actions. If the mainstream media were more objective, her position as Speaker might be in jeopardy. Her resignation would be an honourable step. An admission of misjudgement would be most welcome.

Her disloyalty might come back to haunt the Democrats, if the public catch on to the implications of her visit to Syria.

Iran 1 United Kingdom 0

April 5, 2007

“I’d like to say that myself and my whole team are very grateful for your forgiveness. I’d like to thank yourself and the Iranian people… Thank you very much, sir.”

These are the words of an unidentified British sailor. Hardly the language one expects from a member of Britannia’s wave-ruling navy. Alas, the kowtowing to Iran is becoming infectious.

The treatment of the sailors has been unforgivable. How one of the sailors can thank Ahmadinejad when the female sailor was forced to wear a hijab is beyond belief. The media, of course, have made very little criticism of the parading of the sailors on television, or the forced confessions, or, indeed, the hijab.

It is not hard to imagine the uproar there would be if the US or the UK forced its prisoners to appear on television, let alone if they coerced female Muslim terrorist suspects to wear western-style clothing.

Iran wins this battle but the incident counts as useful evidence in building a case against the volatile and unpredictable Ahmadinejad. Some will be fooled by this Easter ‘gift.’ It certainly will not distract President Bush, who knows that Ahmadinejad would like to present another ‘gift’ to the world in the form of a nuclear weapon.

Publicly, the UK came out of this incident rather embarrassed. One must hope that, privately, the UK plans to help the US (ideally UN as well, but that’s pure fantasy) to ensure future incidents with Iran do not involve nuclear weapons.

The Falklands Conflict

April 3, 2007

Twenty-five years ago, Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands. The UK, led by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, responded by sending a Task Force 8,000 miles to recover its territory. One of the main guiding principles was that of freedom. The right of the Falkland Islanders to be British and enjoy the liberties associated with that.

The military operation was against the advice of many of Mrs Thatcher’s (now Lady Thatcher) advisor’s. Fortunately, the Iron Lady’s resolve was firm and the hostile actions of Argentina’s military dictatorship were punished.

This week, the UK has expressed regret over the Conflict. This seems to have been interpreted by Argentina as a sign of weakness, since the vice-President, Danile Scioli, has renewed claims to the island. Furthermore, Argentina has broken up a joint venture with the UK to search for oil and gas. Some people/countries never learn.

The strength the UK demonstrated in 1982 is sorely needed today in the current dispute with Iran. So far, Iran has achieved its goal of appearing to stand up to a world power and get away scot-free. More significantly, the 15 sailors are still captive at this time.

It is interesting to look at the BBC Have Your Say pages where readers can express their opinions on issues. The majority of opinions published regarding the war in Iraq are very much against the US/UK actions in that country. However, the incident with Iran has prompted a clear majority of British contributors to speak out in favour of a strong military response.

It is disappointing that many people do not seem to see the connection between Iraq, Iran, extremism, and terrorism. Freedom is being threatened. If and when the 15 sailors are released, the threat to world peace will continue to exist in the form of the Iranian leadership. Will those British citizens, who want action for the sake of 15 sailors, continue to press for action for the sake of stability in the region, freedom from oppression for millions, and the safeguarding of our way of life?

More Falklands Info

America’s Fight For Freedom

April 3, 2007

While Democrats, anti-war protesters, leftists and, apparently, many others call for America’s surrender (for that is how a troop withdrawal will be seen by our enemies) in Iraq, the heart of America continues to beat strongly with a passion for liberty for all, freedom from oppression and a secure homeland.

The BBC, not known for its impartiality regarding the war on terror, actually broadcast a programme on one of its radio stations that offered a glimpse of what many Americans believe regarding the war on terror and the war in Iraq. Generally, the protests against the war are given most coverage along with any declarations by the leftist and/or Hollywood crowd. In this instance, the focus was on small-town America and the sacrifice its families are making in the war.

Windthorst, Texas, was the town. The family of Gary Johnston, a courageous 21-year-old member of America’s Armed Forces who lost his life in Iraq, was one of the focal points. The programme emphasised the convictions and resolve of the community.

“Everyone believed that US troops should remain in Iraq to protect America from terrorists, to honour the dead, such as Gary, and to complete the job… even one whose definition was becoming less certain,” said James Coomerasamy, the BBC’s correspondent.

Gary Johnstone’s father, Nubbin, declared,

You want to know why small-town America is losing so many of its people in Iraq? It’s because small-town America still believes in this country, still believes in fighting for the freedom to worship whichever God you believe in. Our young men and women – like Gary – have been sacrificing their lives for this for 200 years. This is America.”

The mainstream media do not broadcast views like these. The impression one receives from a typical newsbroadcast or newspaper editorial is that the war on terror and the war in Iraq do not have popular support in America or in the countries it counts as allies. This is a fallacy.

The support for America’s (and the coalitions’s) foreign policy is widespread but it is not as vocal as the anti-brigade. Anti-whatever protesters have always been louder than the ‘silent’ majority. Rarely, in democratic countries does one find people taking to the streets to demonstrate in favour of something that is already happening.

Unfortunately, the spin in the media is suggesting that the protesters are in a majority and, consequently, many others sheepishly follow… along the lines of … “well, if everyone else thinks Bush (America) is wrong, he (it) must be…”

Thank goodness the President, and many Americans, remain alert to the menace of terrorism and realise the importance of the fight for freedom, not only for America’s sake but for the benefit of the world. May America and its Coalition allies remain steadfast in their commitment to fight extremism.

Iran’s Act of War

March 28, 2007

Not too long ago, the unjust capture of 15 British sailors by Iran (a hostile nation) would have been seen as an act of war. In today’s wishy-washy world of anti-America (and its allies) hysteria, where apologists for terrorism are crawling out of every nook and cranny to be feted on television, this aggressive deed has been relegated to a minor issue in the mainstream media. The UK is already being blamed for provoking the incident and for lying about the true geographical location of its forces. It is a sad day when the left sides with an Iranian leadership that has called for the destruction of Israel, denied the holocaust took place and has as one of its goals the demise of the USA. Sad, but not surprising, when one considers that many of these same people on the left blamed the western world for the 9/11 attacks.

Where the capture has received coverage, the tone and content of the reporting have suggested that the US and the UK have somehow concocted the whole episode in order to have a reason for launching military action against Iran (conveniently forgetting the fact that there are already numerous reasons to justify military action against this hostile nation).

The anti-Bush/America/UK crowd, including numerous Hollywood celebrities, are quick to attack the benevolent forces of the Coalition, and yet not one word is uttered condemning the illegal actions of the Iranians, in this incident or many others (such as the intrusions into Iraq to attack US forces).

It is somewhat ironic that Bush’s foreign policy of spreading freedom and safeguarding our democracy defends the rights of individuals to choose their lifestyles, religions, opinions and political allegiances, while the regimes and extremist groups that the anti-Bush Hollywood herd seems to prefer (over the leaders of the West) outlaw individuality and choice.

The UK’s response to the crisis has been uncharacteristically weak so far. One can only hope that there will be serious consequences for Iran if the 15 sailors are not released in the next day or two. Even if they are freed, Iran’s leadership needs to be given a very clear message about its unacceptable behaviour. The way things are going, Iran will soon have a nuclear weapon – suddenly, it will throw its weight around even more if it knows the rest of the world will sit back and do nothing.

Unfortunately, the rest of the world, in the shape of the UN, will probably do nothing if past form is a guide. Once again, the responsibility for dealing with Iran will fall upon nations like the US and the UK – nations who have the courage and foresight to act with prudence in the best interests of the free world.