United States and Iran

Related Issues: Foreign Policy , Iran , Israel / Palestine

Tags: iran , diplomacy , north korea

Similar Letters: Search for letters similar to this one

Wednesday, 06/24/2009 @ 08:16 PM

To whom it may concern:

Mr President

I am writing you this letter to express to you my views about the United States/Iran situation. However before I begin and for full disclosure,I would like to indicate that I am a conservative and I am the owner of a conservative site called Conservative America(http://americaconservative.ning.com)

I would like to first address your wish to talk with Iran. I am sorry to say that you are making a huge mistake. Countries such as Iran and North Korea do not understand talk.They only understand force. Not only that,but how can you wish to be talking to Iran when Iran is anything but a free country.And how can you declare wanting to talk to Iran when Iran has vowed to destroy Israel,the most trusted US ally of all times.

The recent events in Iran show how brutal the regime is and if you,as President of the United States, the most powerful country and most powerful president of the United States, if you talk with that regime,you are de facto giving the Iranian dictators a white slip saying "we dont care if you kill your own people,we dont care if you attack our allies from the moment we open diplomatic relations".

I am sorry,but that is wrong approach.As I wrote above,countries like Iran and North Korea understand only force,military force. The world has been negotiating with Iran over their nuclear program and hasnt changed anything. The time for talking is over.Now has come the time to use force. Dont kiss Iran's behind.Kick Iran's behind!!!!

Thank you for your time

Best Regards

Your Constituent

avguste

Total Comments: 40

Write your own comment on this letter!

	florimell, on 06/24/2009 @ 10:02 PM wrote:
		I think it is noble that President Obama wants to talk rather than use force. I think that the use of force has a poor track record when it comes to Middle Eastern countries...

	na1215, on 06/24/2009 @ 11:54 PM wrote:
		I think that change for Iran is going to come through both diplomatic talk, but at the same time there will have to be uprising from with in to force the Iranian government to listen to the talks.

	closeupman, on 06/25/2009 @ 11:02 AM wrote:
		So I guess we should just use force whenever we disagree with how a country is being run? Where is the freedom in that? :P Israel our most TRUSTED ally? Only as long as we keep giving them aid. Do you see the Israeli PM doing what we want? No. Where is your letter on Darfur.....Guatanamo Bay...? :P

	harmont, on 06/25/2009 @ 11:20 AM wrote:
		Commenters on this letter need to understand the beliefs of the Iran government. Iran and the leaders believe that if they destroy Israel they can bring forth the coming of the Muslim messiah. Rational site down chatting will not change their religious beliefs. In fact sitting down for so called peace talks is exactly what they want, it buys them time to develop strategies to destroy Israel. In any negation you have to know the other sides end game. Iran's is to destroy Israel. Do I think we should send troops NO. But our President should have stood up for the people of Iran right away, and encouraged them to stand for freedom. Obama is trying to play both sides of the fence and I believe it makes him look indecisive.

	rjnaz, on 07/02/2009 @ 10:56 AM wrote:
		Force is what usually gets us involved in prolonged conflicts. These regimes only want one things: the perpetual hold of power. There are other ways to isolate them and bring them to the general community of nations. Force should only be reserved in self defense.

	Titopoet, on 07/02/2009 @ 11:38 AM wrote:
		Wow, lets just go to war with everyone. Are you going to make the draft mandatory to fight such endless wars?

	Lao_Tse, on 07/02/2009 @ 11:51 AM wrote:
		The major flaw in your reasoning is identifying military force as the only true force. As the most important economic and cultural power in the world the United States has many other avenues open to it. Since Iran recently offended the EU there will probably be more economic pressure on the regime. Finally you are completely off base in lumping North Korea and Iran as similar regimes. Iran is not based on military power, as North Korea is, it is based (like it or not) on popularity. The majority of Iran's citizens have no problem with the theocratic regime only the current government.

	willJosh44, on 07/02/2009 @ 12:01 PM wrote:
		Force is only reasonable in times of emergency. There are too many good people in Iran to even think about using force

	jcarryl, on 07/02/2009 @ 12:33 PM wrote:
		There is no engaging with this Iran. And people are paying for their views with their lives. The country is not free. But the days of Big Stick Gunboat diplomacy are over. The world has always been more complicated than this simplistic and reductive ideology recognizes. Disengage from Iran, the mouse that roared. Recognize Palestine equally with Israel which exists at the Palestinian's expense--undo that damage we the West did, and take that argument away from the dicator Ahmadinejad. The US has struggled with equality and freedom and MUST recognize the sovereignty of others to do the same, whether we like it or not.

	earthjiva, on 07/02/2009 @ 01:04 PM wrote:
		Keeping channels of communication open is imperative to an overall stability in the world. These countries are in fact dangerous threats to the security of the world. Should we "lock up these dangerous countries" just like we "lock up our criminals" or should we keep lines of communication open? Remember, these countries have citizens with opposing points of view who may one day take control of those who have the aggressive intentions. If we are to help others seize power from these dictators and tyrants, it is absolutely necessary that we keep lines of discussion open. Just because we talk and listen does not mean we have to be soft either. As a last resort, of course force is an option, but it's wise to not shut off communication. That is never the right answer unless it is the very last step, which is what you seem to believe is that stage we are at right now. I do not think we are quite at the stage where we should be vengeful yet. There is still time to talk.

	ferretstroker, on 07/02/2009 @ 01:38 PM wrote:
		Why should we stoop down to the level of just responding to other country's with force? It's that war hawk attitude that has given America such a bad name internationally. Let's try something new.

	Scoobey, on 07/02/2009 @ 01:39 PM wrote:
		As a professional mediator, I know from long experience that NO human is beyond talking with. Some are more difficult, some are deeply dishonest, but I've never met anyone who could not be reached somehow. Even force is just a tool to supplement talking: all wars end in negotiated truces. So I believe in what (Republican) Teddy Roosevelt said: speak softly and carry a big stick. Which is different than merely carrying the stick!

	LRush, on 07/02/2009 @ 02:02 PM wrote:
		I respect your right to say what you want, but I think saying that Iran (or any country) only understands force or only wants to destroy us or our allies is extremely shortsighted. As the recent post-election protests in Iran show, people who hold such beliefs do not represent all—or even most—of the Iranian people. Most Iranians are just like us. They want peace. They want free elections. Our government's offer to engage with theirs could show that they have Western backing should they decide to vote out the extremists among their elected officials.

	Maco, on 07/02/2009 @ 02:06 PM wrote:
		This has to be the stupidest letter I've read in a long time. True, lasting political change has to happen from within. It looks like Iran has the desire to do that and... by the way... it's thier country. Not yours.

	calcondor123, on 07/02/2009 @ 02:27 PM wrote:
		noble as it may be, mr. obama is using the wrong aproach, these are common criminals that forcefully took power, not rational men. you dont use sanctions for a murderer or a burglar, do you? you must forcefully stop him from doing wrong. as i said, we arent dealing with rational people who reckognize us as their fellow men (and women), but as animals. how can you possibly talk with such people?

	Zwiggle, on 07/02/2009 @ 02:32 PM wrote:
		Have you ever thought to understand what diplomacy is. It is the art of talking with your enemy's. You way is like betting your kid because he didn't take out the garbage.

	bbaughman, on 07/02/2009 @ 02:44 PM wrote:
		Attack first, ask questions later; hasn't worked so well for us Americans. Diplomacy first is what civilized countries do.

	calcondor123, on 07/02/2009 @ 02:47 PM wrote:
		yes, well, children are rational beings if you raise them correctly, without vilolence. these people cannot be compared to children, children dont murder, and a i said, you dont use diplomacy for violent crimes, these people dont listen to reason, if you think there is a single reasonable terrorist, (ira not included) then im afraid you need more real world experience, why dont you stand in the middle of fallujah and try and use diplomacy to get them to stop trying to kill you. tell me how it workes, if you dont get kidknapped or shot.

	princess2pagan, on 07/02/2009 @ 02:57 PM wrote:
		i'm not sure what to think of our current state of affairs with iran. they have a president and supreme ruler so who is it that makes the ultimate decision? talking to people who don't want to listen well we all have experiences of this at some or another and no matter how you try and make somebody see reason well it doesn't work. its sad but true.

	calcondor123, on 07/02/2009 @ 03:09 PM wrote:
		thank you for your common sense, princess

	MICKU28, on 07/02/2009 @ 03:10 PM wrote:
		At some points USA looks better and at some Iran look better, the topic is so complicated that we cant reach a one sided result

	libanbekele, on 07/02/2009 @ 03:32 PM wrote:
		As much as I appreciate Obama trying to veer from the Bush/Cheney tactics and become diplomatic, it is pretty much futile in the case of Iran and N. Korea. We just saw how rigged the elections in Iran became so it is obvious that they want to be seen as a threat as does N. Korea since they are test-firing missles and making threats on the U.S. every other week.

	choweric2005, on 07/03/2009 @ 11:11 AM wrote:
		It's clear that the world communities have been imposing sanctions against Iran and results are slim, but a full out conflict with force doesn't seem to be the best idea.

	tallguyryan, on 07/03/2009 @ 11:29 AM wrote:
		I think you can always talk out your issues, it is a start to talk and have a treaty, even if it is broken it is a record of wrong actions. That is how we justify wars! Then we can wipe them off the planet and feel good about it! JOKING

	everythingsfree, on 07/03/2009 @ 01:47 PM wrote:
		I really fail to see how diplomacy is a bad idea with Iran. When you talk about Iran right now, yes, you are talking about Ahmadinejad who is corrupt as they come. But the protests in Iran have proven that if the right person is in office and Americans support them, diplomacy is possible.

	aravail, on 07/03/2009 @ 06:05 PM wrote:
		Harmont, Israeli settlers believe exactly the same thing and wish to hasten the same apocalypse. What can we do about it? Iranians may not want the theocracy they have, but unlike the Iraqi Kurds, they don't want our help re-making the government. We've already re-made Iran once in living memory -- we can't keep doing it every 50 years when the warranty runs out. American-made regimes have worse mileage than American cars now.

	iblim06, on 07/03/2009 @ 07:23 PM wrote:
		The premature use of force is the reason our military is overstretched at the moment. Glad you "conservatives" are not in control. Remember Theodore Roosevelt's Big Stick Diplomacy... sometimes talking is better than just trying to bomb away your problems.

	staceyg1976, on 07/03/2009 @ 08:52 PM wrote:
		We cannot just simply bomb Iran for the things that we do not agree with. You cannot just start attacking countries just because you disagree with their way of life. There are steps that we must go through like every other member of the United Nations. If we go around flexing our power, then we will be consider the dictators of a New World Order. Just like everything in life, there is a process that one must go through in order to solve a problem. That is the way civilized people act and model to those around them.

	billybob75, on 07/03/2009 @ 09:41 PM wrote:
		We should totally kick Iran's behind, that'll learn 'em about democracy. We should run up more debt for the worthy cause of teaching democracy by dropping the latest high-tech and high dollar munitions all over their people. After all nothing strengthens a countries internal democratic structure like a military presence and a predator drones sponsored by a country in an opposite hemisphere of the globe. Plus if we institute a draft we could effectively lower our unemployment rate!

	hold_steady, on 07/05/2009 @ 05:09 AM wrote:
		I feel this mentality is ignorant jingoism that helps to fuel the international perception of America as Bully. Peacekeeping diplomacy will save lives, not so called vigilante responses to insane regime leaders. Brains, not brawn.

	Treas, on 07/05/2009 @ 05:38 AM wrote:
		It is quite evident that there is no military solution to the Iranian problem unless the major powers unanimously agree to an attack on Iran.

	The_Guru, on 07/06/2009 @ 07:18 AM wrote:
		Zwiggle said it pretty well... Diplomacy isn't working out problems with friends. Diplomacy is working out problems with people you don't see eye to eye with. Reagan, for all his tough talk, sat down and talked with our enemies. That's why he was effective in dealing with the Soviets. People confuse themselves with what they see on television. The real diplomacy never makes its way into the news until it either succeeds or fails.

	Conservative America, on 07/07/2009 @ 01:31 AM wrote:
		Negotiating with dictators be it military or religious has never worked. Oh and by the way,be it military or religious,a dictatorship is still a dictatorship and such should never be talked to. How many years is the world community going to negotiate with Iran?until they do another Holocaust? The world community has done enough negotiating. Time for action has come. Yes,maybe the Iran population is happy with a religious dictatorship.Maybe they are not. Personally,seeing the manifestations the last few weeks,I believe the Iran population wants freedom,however, they have all been conditioned to obey the "master" no matter what. Such a thing is hard to beat. In addition, personally,during the manifestations I was hoping for someone within the opposition to take control and launch a full rebellion.But again,it is hard to revolt when you have been trained and conditioned all your life to obey.

	awilson6010, on 07/15/2009 @ 08:35 AM wrote:
		Force only leads to more force. If we use force on Iran and North Korea they will explode like the powder kegs they are. Economic sanctions are the way to go, you have to keep power hungry countries like this weak.

	mmoehl, on 07/16/2009 @ 06:26 AM wrote:
		I agree that countries like Iran and North Korea have never seemed to be open to rational discussion. However, we must be careful, it is not the people of the country that are closed to communication, but the governments. If we were to, as the writer said, Kick their behinds, then we have to be aware that we would be attacking not only the government but the people of that country. The US has had many detractors over the last decade, how would we have felt if the government talks, negotiations and disagreements left the governmental sphere and attacked us as citizens, as they did on 9/11?

	farmbrough, on 09/08/2009 @ 07:49 PM wrote:
		I think if we follow the path that "Countries such as Iran and North Korea do not understand talk", we will end up walking into an awful lot of wars. We have had enough of our young people coming homein body bags and our economy being crippled by the expense of war. I am sure the people who live in the countries where we have a military presence are sick of it too. Bear in mind that when we "kick Iran's behind", we don't just kick Mr Ahmadinnejhad's, we also kick the behinds of the many Iranians who don't support him, and who would be only too pleased to see more dialogue between the West and their country.

	mattbuzaman, on 09/08/2009 @ 10:03 PM wrote:
		Asia is too big and too old to be bent to western powers and forces. Eric Margolis has been doing yeoman's work on this subject. You should read 'American Raj'.

	4dramamama, on 09/08/2009 @ 10:23 PM wrote:
		It is ridiculous that the president of our country would add power and credibility to such a tyrannical maniac. Where has our honor gone? Where is American dignity?

	frank88, on 09/10/2009 @ 07:12 PM wrote:
		It is imperative that we talk to Iran and dissuade them from getting Nuclear weapons at any cost. Iran has actually shown signs of listening in on the international community and is years away from the autoritarian regime of North Korea, a failed state.

	crazychicken327, on 09/10/2009 @ 08:57 PM wrote:
		I say it doesn't matter if we kiss Iran's butt or not they are going to do something to agitate us into a war with them