I Saw the News Today, Oh Boy

Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow
--Macbeth, Act V, sc. iv

I watched the UN address last night by Bush and Ahmadinejad and was highly entertained by the pleasing and earnest smiles of President Bush, being as they crossed his face at the most inappropos of moments. But the thing that concerned me was the conspicuous absence of U.S. diplomats when the President of Iran addressed the chamber.

Granted, the content of his ideology is to be rejected, even loathed, and his speech--as Bush's--was so much fluff. But it is the U.N., and you give the devil his due if you intend to deal with him as a member of the world community. And there are many devils, and few angels, out there.

This may be what passes for diplomacy these days, but it exudes contempt for Iran. Is this the U.S.'s idea of how to go about achieving an accommodation with Iran?

Has the U.S. made a policy decision already, and therefore needs no further data to confuse the matter? Why does the U.S. even have a State Department anymore? Let's just bully everyone into submission; it's so much faster (at least in the beginning). I have heard the hawks slavering over the prospect of "nuking them all", so confident are they of the righteousness of their position and the infinite capability of our military, even as it is stretched to its brink.

Here are a few thoughts beyond the pale:

(1) As a military planner, the worst-case scenario should be assumed. Since our intelligence is lacking, then one must assume that Iran already has a nuclear weapon. To omit this option is pie-in-the-sky planning; Iraq should put an end to that approach.

(2) If we bomb Iran, then assume that the military and political situation in Iraq will deteriorate due to Iranian counter pressure. It's safe to assume that the Iranian apparatus in Iraq is in sleeper mode, awaiting the call to activation. If and when this occurs, does Stalingrad or Little Bighorn ring a bell?

(3) A concerted Sunni/Shiia/militia/Iranian offensive would be a tough nut for the U.S. military to crack. Has any military planner addressed this worst-case scenario with an Operations Plan? How does a nation reinforce and resupply an army thousands of miles away? Think Bataan and Corregidor.

(4) The U.S. has shifted its ADHD-ADD focus to Iran because it is so easy to hate them (and, because once you messy your blotter up with all of your finger paint, it is so easy just to start on a new sheet). But why are the extremists so powerful in that nation?

We rattle our swords at Iran, but Pakistan can sign a treaty with the Taliban and maintain a precarious balance with radical Islamists, all the while sitting on nuclear weapons. Nobody at the National Command level seems interested in this fact. Someday, Pakistan nukes can be in the hands of those radical Islamists. Oh well, tomorrow's another day.