Irans current behavior is based on the fact that the last nation that interfered in their right to self government and to elect their own government was the United States, in 1954, and they had to deal with a government imposed on them again, by the United States, for an additional 25 years.

I think they have more reasons to be suspect of the United States than vice versa, but as usual, U.S. policy with regard to the Middle East has tended to revolve around the concept of “What is OUR oil doing under their SOIL”

After World War II, Harry Truman pretty much stuck to the original idea of self determination with regard to other countries when he insisted that for Britain to get American aid to rebuild after that war, they would have to give up their colonies, and give up their efforts to control other countries like Iran, particularly their natural resources. Truman was a true “free market” sort of guy, who beleived it would be cheaper to trade with other countries for their oil, than to try to use miltary power projection to get it. Basically everyone forgets that the cost of a gallon of gas includes the cost of the taxes that pays for the military presence in the Middle East.

And lets not forget, that most of the nuclear equipment that exists in Iran has the words “Made in America” on them. While the Shah was in power, the U.S. was selling him the equipment to do exactly what the Iranians are doing now. Setting up nuclear power stations so they would not have to use fifty percent of their own oil to generate electricity. So there would be more oil for export to the United States. So gasoline for Americans would get cheaper, not more expensive. When petroleum is Irans main export product, it is more sensible to them to sell it on the open market, than it is for them to use it inside their own country.

After the Islamic Revolution in 1979, the Islamic government shut down those plants because they decided using this American/Western technology was totally inappropriate for an Islamic country if they did not need to use it. At the time, they had enough oil to meet those needs, however the U.S. embargo of the new Islamic State changed that dynamic and in order to keep up their own way of life, they would have to sell more oil, which made the option of using nuclear power more necessary than it had previously been.

Oddly enough, after 30 years, American Conservative magazine finally admits that perhaps in 1980, American went in the wrong direction when they chose Reagan rather than Carter;

The American Conservative, April 6, 2009 Issue

…The new anti-malaise coalition, Left and Right, agreed on a nationalism that regarded an America with any kind of limits as a place that could never be America in any meaningful sense. They believed in the divine American mission and the rhetoric behind it: “leader of the free world,” “the last best hope for man on earth,” “the shining city on a hill.” Carter’s speech, to them, was heresy. Thus Reagan, with help from other former liberals, could transform conservatism from a traditional doctrine of prudence, caution, and sustainability—a tough sell politically—into a highly marketable brand of American exceptionalism.

Unfortunately, as Carter feared, the American mission and lifestyle proved unsustainable. In the short run, the Saudis and other OPEC nations and oil producers slaked America’s dependence on foreign oil. The Chinese and other emerging industrial nations were willing to provide cheap consumer goods and buy U.S. Treasuries so that American consumers could have plenty of choices at the marketplace. This cut the inflation that bedeviled the Carter administration. In return, the U.S. military provided protection and stability around the globe through deficit financing. The hoped-for reduction of government that was a part of Reagan’s rhetoric was junked because it threatened to shatter the “you can have it all” coalition. Instead, government grew, in part through a neat trick called supply-side economics in which the New Deal, the New Frontier, and even the Great Society could be offered at low cost to taxpayers through massive levels of borrowing. Wrapped around all of this was a nationalistic attitude. The launching of a few cruise missiles every now and then disguised the loss of American economic independence.

After what happened to Carter, no American politician today is brave enough to ask for limits. Bush I said that our way of life is non-negotiable. Bush II told Americans to go shopping after 9/11. President Obama says Americans “will not apologize for our way of life.” President Carter is remembered as a weak man—yet no politician now (outside of perhaps Ron Paul) has the guts to make a similarly bold speech during our current economic crisis.

http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/apr/06/00014//

basically Carter, stated in 1979, that America had two choice and both of them had a price. We could give up dependence on foreign oil. This would allow America to continue to be the self reliant and self dependent nation created by the Founding Fathers. Or we could chose to rely on foreign oil as well as debt to foreign powers in order to borrow the money to pay for the military force that such reliance required. The path Carter suggested was harder, and would require a temporary sacrifice, but no nation would ever be able to economically threaten the United States by calling in the debt or by dumping the debt for pennies on the dollar in order to wreck the American economy. Its no mistake that the nation that America owes the most money to is one of the few large Communist countries to survive the Cold War, and its no mistake that Lenin said that when Capitalism dies, Communist will sell them the rope it hangs itself with.

It might have been more difficult for a few years to live under Carters vision. America has enough oil shale to make up 3 Saudi Arabias, and it was difficult to extract that oil cheaply back then, but Carter also beleived that there is nothing America cannot do when it sets its mind to it. That eventually America would find a way to extract that oil as cheaply or more cheaply than having to have it shipped half way across the world costs today.

However, the spoiled children of the greatest generation didnt want to sacrifice at all and Reagans promise of a big party for everyone, paid for on a national credit card was much more appealing. Reagan simply beleived that by the time the bill came in, someone else would be in the White House.

Legislature, we’ve got your number By Jay Bookman The Atlanta Urinal-Constitution Thursday, April 09, 2009, So let’s call some of them by name: Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle, the governor wannabe: Does he expect to get votes and campaign money from metro Atlanta? Call him up and ask him at 404-XXX-XXXX.-

OK, now guess why he wants to burn their houses to the ground, check it out, they refuse to raise taxes.

For Marta.

Mob rules in the banana republic.

While acknowledging that the recession makes the political battle more difficult, President Obama plans to begin addressing the country’s immigration system this year, including looking for a path for illegal immigrants to become legal, a senior administration official said on Wednesday.

Man, the libs are trotting out their own demise.

Cool.

Karachi police chief Waseem Ahmed said April 8 that police had arrested 5 militants belonging to Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LJ) who reportedly were planning attacks on seven government buildings in Karachi, British newspaper the Telegraph reported. The targets included the home of the interior minister, police headquarters, Shiite religious centers and suppliers cooperating with NATO forces. LJ is a jihadist group based in Punjab province allied with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan.

Outta here.

Midori:

Speaking of accidents……you’re nothing more than a hit and run artist here, living vicariously thru.

I survived.

You drove yourself into a ditch.

Catch ‘ya tomorrow if I have time.