A Fascist Iran and Its American Enablers

No surprises here really. After a reasonably worded editorial Sunday slamming Iran's sham elections (Neither Real Nor Free), the Times ended with this brilliant piece of logic:

We know that some in this country and in Israel will say that this election is proof that there can be no dealing with Iran and that military action is the only choice. The last thing the United States or Israel needs is another war with a Muslim state. An attack would only feed Iran’s nuclear ambitions and spur it to take even greater efforts to hide its program.

The only choice is negotiations backed by credible incentives and tough sanctions. Even if the mullahs had allowed Mr. Moussavi to win, that would still be true.

Neville Chamberlain would be proud. If Obama and co. can just find their Sudentenland to mollify the mullahs with, it can be 1938 all over again, Ahmedenijad can be named Time's Man of the Year, and Obama can declare Peace in Our Time for once and all.

The thing is, I like Obama in general. I think he's thoughtful and does genuinely respect other people's opinions. But on certain issues, his moral relativisivism is downright dangerous. He praised the 'vigorous' debate taking place in Iran leading up to Friday's election but as of Monday, he had said nothing condemning the result or to offer support to the defrauded voters - the very people he claims to want to help stand up for freedom. His silence at this moment is downright shameful. Any notion of engagement under this pretext is doomed to fail. All it will do is create a nice photo op for the mullahs and their lackey Ahmedenijad to sound contrite while the centrifuges whirl and they continue to foment Islamist revolution in Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

Enter Roger Cohen. He offered a worthless apology Sunday for pegging Iran wrong (Iran's Day of Anguish):

I’ve argued for engagement with Iran and I still believe in it, although, in the name of the millions defrauded, President Obama’s outreach must now await a decent interval.

I’ve also argued that, although repressive, the Islamic Republic offers significant margins of freedom by regional standards. I erred in underestimating the brutality and cynicism of a regime that understands the uses of ruthlessness.

Cohen spent the months leading up to the fraudulent election having a virtual verbal love affair with the Iran and its repressive regime. He even claimed Jews have it well there. And he routinely accused Israel of fear mongering when it came to Iran's nuclear program. In his mind, Israel was far more of a threat to world peace than the mullahs.

Christopher Hitchens penned an excellent piece for Slate Sunday called "Don't Call What Happened in Iran Last Week an Election," in which he built up to this climactic ending:

Mention of the Lebanese elections impels me to pass on what I saw with my own eyes at a recent Hezbollah rally in south Beirut, Lebanon. In a large hall that featured the official attendance of a delegation from the Iranian Embassy, the most luridly displayed poster of the pro-Iranian party was a nuclear mushroom cloud! Underneath this telling symbol was a caption warning the "Zionists" of what lay in store. We sometimes forget that Iran still officially denies any intention of acquiring nuclear weapons. Yet Ahmadinejad recently hailed an Iranian missile launch as a counterpart to Iran's success with nuclear centrifuges, and Hezbollah has certainly been allowed to form the idea that the Iranian reactors may have nonpeaceful applications. This means, among other things, that the vicious manipulation by which the mullahs control Iran can no longer be considered their "internal affair." Fascism at home sooner or later means fascism abroad. Face it now or fight it later. Meanwhile, give it its right name.

It's time for the Times and Obama to call a spade a spade: the Iranians are fascists, and obsessed with Israel's destruction in a Nazi-like way. You can't negotiate with fascists - plain and simple. You can only deal with them through force. It's unfortunate and painful - but ignoring the truth only means you have to confront them down the road when they are stronger and even more brazen. It took Europe too long to learn this painful lesson in the 1930s. The Times and Obama still haven't learnt it - they instead have taken on the role of being Iran's enablers.

The famous saying deserves a mention here: All that is required for evil to flourish in the world is for good men to do nothing. I do believe Obama is a good man and that the people at the NY Times mean well (maybe not Roger Cohen ;-)

And I'm sure after Iran deploys its first nukes, we can all count on a nice sentence-long apology from Roger Cohen and the official editorial in the NY Times. Let's hope Obama wakes up and grows a pair before it comes to that.