By: JOSEPH CRISP
The root behind British (and the rest of Europe and often America as well) activities toward Iran and other criminal regimes stem from money and the tyranny of liberal "political correctness".
They have also been cowed by the thunderings of Islamic radicals in their own countries. Money is a big part of it (in my opinion the urgency is driven by the spread of socialism which simply doesn't work) and that is why so many liberal, democratic countries are friendly with bloody dictatorships. Everyone trades with Red China, many trade with Iran and many trade with Communist Cuba, though the USA does not, this is only because politicians fear the wrath of Cuban voters in Florida.
It seems there is no limit to the amount of oppression the "Free World" is willing to overlook if they can make a buck in the process.
For President Carter to sell out the Shah is not surprising (stupid but not surprising) as he was (and is) a dimwit who is way too friendly with terrorist regimes. He was one of the worst presidents America has had. The British attitude is a little more perplexing because of their general foreign policy habits in modern times. All over the western world there is a liberal timidity to take pride in our countries, culture and way of life. In the United States at least that has not extended to political ideals. All American politicians believe that democratic republics are best, they don't mind saying so and don't mind trying to spread republicanism around the world. The monarchies of Europe have every right to have this same attitude about their own governments yet they strangely do not and have not for quite a long time. Republics naturally push for more republics yet where are the constitutional monarchies of the world standing up to say that their system is best and others would do well to adopt it? There are some of course, but none seem to make it to positions of any influence.
Fortunately, I have heard more American commentators lately saying that not doing more to support the Shah was a mistake, however as with revolutionary France, Soviet Russia and China this seems to be a realization that always comes after the fact and which is soon forgotten.
When will the west learn?
Joseph Crisp Wednesday, July 18, 2007.
The root behind British (and the rest of Europe and often America as well) activities toward Iran and other criminal regimes stem from money and the tyranny of liberal "political correctness".
They have also been cowed by the thunderings of Islamic radicals in their own countries. Money is a big part of it (in my opinion the urgency is driven by the spread of socialism which simply doesn't work) and that is why so many liberal, democratic countries are friendly with bloody dictatorships. Everyone trades with Red China, many trade with Iran and many trade with Communist Cuba, though the USA does not, this is only because politicians fear the wrath of Cuban voters in Florida.
It seems there is no limit to the amount of oppression the "Free World" is willing to overlook if they can make a buck in the process.
For President Carter to sell out the Shah is not surprising (stupid but not surprising) as he was (and is) a dimwit who is way too friendly with terrorist regimes. He was one of the worst presidents America has had. The British attitude is a little more perplexing because of their general foreign policy habits in modern times. All over the western world there is a liberal timidity to take pride in our countries, culture and way of life. In the United States at least that has not extended to political ideals. All American politicians believe that democratic republics are best, they don't mind saying so and don't mind trying to spread republicanism around the world. The monarchies of Europe have every right to have this same attitude about their own governments yet they strangely do not and have not for quite a long time. Republics naturally push for more republics yet where are the constitutional monarchies of the world standing up to say that their system is best and others would do well to adopt it? There are some of course, but none seem to make it to positions of any influence.
Fortunately, I have heard more American commentators lately saying that not doing more to support the Shah was a mistake, however as with revolutionary France, Soviet Russia and China this seems to be a realization that always comes after the fact and which is soon forgotten.
When will the west learn?
Joseph Crisp Wednesday, July 18, 2007.
No comments:
Post a Comment