Foreign Policy

Huntsman Gets Serious on Iran!

|

The Republican candidate who gets, in my judgment, a bit too much credit for being different in a non-bellicose way from his opponents on matters of foreign policy, gets very close to calling for pre-emptive war on Iran on CNN's Piers Morgan last night. month (Without ever saying the words, of course.)

As Think Progress sums up:

Huntsman's comment, which comes as the U.S. faces difficulty in gaining U.N. Security Council support for another round of even more punitive sanctions, is perhaps the most hawkish position taken by a GOP presidential candidate. His position removes the crucial caveat, which most Iran-hawks embrace, that military action should only be taken if sanctions fail….

[From the transcript]: You can layer sanction upon sanction and I think in the end the sanctions aren't going to have much of an impact. Sanctions have already been taken to the U.N. Security Council. You can go for another round of sanctions and that probably should be tried. You can go after their state bank. You can sanction the elite. You can sanction those travelling in and out. You can tighten the noose in ways that will make life a lot more difficult from an economic standpoint. But my sense is that their ultimate aspiration is to become a nuclear power, in which case sanctions probably aren't going to get you there. And that means [it's] likely we're going to have a conversation with Israel at some point. As we approach that point it's important for the United States to remind the world what it means to be a friend and ally of the United States….

The conclusion that a "conversation with Israel" is inevitable, would appear to be a reference to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's recent saber-rattling against Iran and the belief held by many Iran-hawks that if the U.S. doesn't act militarily against Iran, Israel will attack unilaterally.

I agree it's hard to read those last comments in any other way, in a world where everyone is (rightly) reluctant to say the words "We should start a war with Iran now" and yet want the world, and Iran, to think that they think that's exactly what we should do. 

The Huntsman speaketh:

Advertisement

NEXT: Locals Drive Out Neighborhood Nuisance; "System" Gets Credit

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s only ‘pre-emptive’ if they aren’t already at war with you. They are so it’s not.

      1. The Iranian bombs are raining on my head as we speak. But I’ve got my head in the sand, so I’m ignoring them.

        1. The folk in Khobar Towers didn’t have that luxury.

          1. yeah bra ….in saudi arabia. might as well have been nebraska!

          2. This is one hell of a slow war. Don’t you plan your follow-up less than 15 years after your initial strike?

            1. Lots of ‘follow-up’ in arming Iraq Shi’ite militias and giving shelter to AQ ‘prisoners’ after invading Afstan.

              1. Their subtle and devious in fighting us by not fighting us. Send in the nukes.

              2. What kind of evil bastards would invade Iraq or help out Muslim radicals in Afghanistan?

                1. What kind of fucking stupid evil bastards would invade Iraq or help out Muslim radicals in Afghanistan?

                  FIFY

          3. So we were straight up at war with the Soviet Union for decades, rather than engaged in a series of proxy wars?

      2. If the Iranian navy heading for American waters at full steam doesn’t constitute an act of war, their constant Flying Killer Robot flyovers certainly do.

        1. None of those are acts of war. This is: The 9/11 Commission found that “senior al Qaeda operatives and trainers traveled to Iran to receive training in explosives,” and that “8 to 10 of the 14 Saudi ‘muscle’ operatives traveled into or out of Iran between October 2000 and February 2001.” During the Afghanistan war, Iran welcomed fleeing al Qaeda and Taliban fighters.

          http://www.aynrand.org/site/Ne….._ctrl=2450

          1. I believe the actual 9/11 hijackers received their flight training in Florida, so we should start bombing Tallahassee too?

            1. you won’t hear me objecting.

            2. You’re being an obtuse idiot. I know you’re smarter than this.

          2. Take note that none of those Saudis went to Saudi Arabia before 9/11 and that is why we need to support the house of Saud.

          3. But the CIA trained and armed Bin Laden’s crack-team of uber-terrorists. Shit…this means…we MUST GO BACK IN TIME AND DESTROY THE CIA CIRCA 1980 SINCE ITS THEIR FUCKING FAULT.

            We…are through…the looking glass people.

    1. So, since the United States attacked Iran and installed a puppet government in 1954, Iran should be attacked again?

      1. that was then, this is now…and we’re waay moar lethal than evah

    2. It’s only ‘pre-emptive’ if they aren’t already at war with you. They are so it’s not.

      Iran has been fighting a proxy war against the US in Iraq and Afghanistan for years. They have supplied weapons and support to people fighting American troops. Even some of their own Quds forces types have crossed the borders for actual fighting.

      So, yeah, a state of war has existed. We just haven’t bothered to officially acknowledge it.

      1. +ONE MILLIONS OH GOD THANK YOU

      2. oh, well we should definitely start a shooting war then…

      3. So they started a war on the US because we invaded and occupied their neighboring countries for like a decade? Those belligerent scumbags!

        1. Don’t forget the U.S. attacking them in 1954 and putting a a puppet government that brutalized the population.

          Oh, and of course the negotiations that George Bush scuppered when the state department started bringing the Iranians on board for an anti-al Queda alliance. Can’t kill the narrative that they are allied with al Queda, a Sunni group that thinks that the only good Shiites are subservient or dead.

          1. tarran, you have fallen victim of more muslim conspiracy theories. If you are to believe that Operation Ajax really happened then you would have to believe that American and British agents actually bombed nursery schools in Iran and blamed the murders on Mossadeq in order to help oust him…and if you believe that then you are basically accusing good americans of being terorists and if you are doing that then you are a terrorist muslim extremist conspiracy theorist and I will not sit here and listen to your crap any longer!! go play with your communist joo hating friends elsewhere.

            1. tarran,
              Who worked with Jimmy Carter to help make sure that the Shah got to come chill in America? good american, but his name slips my mind.

          2. Hey, let’s not forget supporting the guy who committing horrific atrocities against them, before he became inconvenient and had to be whacked.

          3. Don’t forget the U.S. attacking them in 1954 and putting a a puppet government that brutalized the population.

            Typcial bullshit. The CIA played a marginal role swapping out one dictator for another one. Does not given them an reason to kill Americans today.

            Oh, and of course the negotiations that George Bush scuppered when the state department started bringing the Iranians on board for an anti-al Queda alliance.

            Trusting the word of the government of Iran. How cute.

            1. Trusting our incompetent government to actually do anything useful/productive/constitutional/moral in the Middle East after 60+ years of abject failure. How Cute.

            2. Operation Ajax bitches….Kermit Roosevelt, MI6, CIA getting protect British petroleum oil…you are really ignorant huh Cytotoxic? you really don’t know that the US government bombed nursery schools and blamed it on Mossadeq to help decrease his popularity? yes your government will kill innocent children.

  2. He couldn’t remember the lyrics to Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran.

    1. I remember that. And “Message to Khomeini”, which also included a line about our Boy Scouts being able to wipe them out.

  3. By the by, I made the “I just saw it so I thought it was brand new” mistake–that clip was from a few weeks ago, not last night. Post fixed.

  4. What I’m curious about is whether or not Obama will run as the foreign policy dove he claimed to be in 2008, and not the shoot-first-ask-later drone master that he has been since taking office.

    When you look at Huntsman or any of the other GOP candidates they all pretty much sing the same hawkish tune when it comes Iran -mainly we need to bomb it like yesterday- but they sound like a lot of bluster and not much else.

    Whereas when Obama says he’s going to stick with sanctions, UNSC resolutions etc. it makes me wonder if he really intends on doing more, or if he isn’t already doing more we just don’t know about it.

    There’s little doubt that once Assad ends up on a lamppost somewhere in Damascus Iran will be under increasing pressure to pick up the jihad funding slack for Hezbollah and the other nitwits in the region. Lebanese moderates will see less interference from Syria’s Hezbollah arm, which will increase pressure on Iran’s Supreme council to crack down even harder.

    One thing is for sure, Iran will be the flashpoint for the next president. And I don’t believe a single fucking word out of any of them at this point in terms of what they say they will do and what they end up doing. Bush II ran on an anti-nation building foreign policy, and we saw how well that worked out.

    1. I wonder if Obama will fly drones in circles around the buildings where the debates in the general will occur?

    2. What I’m curious about is whether or not Obama will run as the foreign policy dove he claimed to be in 2008, and not the shoot-first-ask-later drone master that he has been since taking office.
      ————————-

      what are you talking about? Obama has shown you what he will do by his action; any words he uses are immaterial. Previous actions set the course for future actions. It’s like domestic or economic policy. Sane people knew the moderate talk was bullshit because there was nothing moderate in Obama’s history.

      Bigger question is what the results of his foreign policy are. The Brotherhood is going to run Egypt; a similar group will run Libya. Talk of “democracy” is just that, talk. The mobs in Tahrir Square are not that much different from OWS.

  5. “””Israel will attack unilaterally.””

    They have been saying that for years, they don’t have the capability to do more then a token attack at that range. Especially since they have to fly over several not very friendly Muslim countries to get to Iran.

    1. only heavy bombers can deliver the newest deep-penetrator, bunker busters which use retired 16″ gun barrels packed w classified high explosives.

    2. Not really, look at the map. They’re friends with Jordan. We own IRAQ. What else is there ?

      1. Apparently SA has told them it’s okay to use their airspace to attack Iran too.

        1. Actually, if u listen to WIKI-LEAKS…they actually DID!!!

    3. “””Israel will attack unilaterally.””

      The logic seems to be: if the U.S. doesn’t attack Iran, then Israel will attack Iran unilaterally, so the U.S. should attack Iran to prevent Israel from attacking Iran unilaterally.

      Yeah, I don’t understand it either.

  6. Yes, those dastardly Iranians are going to nuke us with their state of the art goat delivery system.

    Btw, is it in anyway logical for Muslims to want to nuke the country that has the Dome of the Rock mosque, which as I understand it is the third holiest site in Islam?

    1. “Logical” is not their forte.

      1. Cyto, you are such an ignorant moron that I get physical pain reading your superstitious drivel.

        Educate yourself

        1. Are you painfully unself-aware on purpose or are just terminally inept?

        2. Also, educate yourself: http://www.aynrand.org/site/Ne….._ctrl=2450

          My link isn’t to a fucking Wikipedia article by the way. Pathetic.

          1. Wikipedia is much more reliable an Ayn Rand-derived slanted dogmatic foreign policy worldview completely at odds with her economic worldview. Israel has been waging her style of war for years, and its just a fucking pariah state.

          2. The wikipedia article is a nice one stop shop to indicate areas you should research.

            Your cult’s website, on the other hand… Well, you realize you sugarfreed the link, right?

            I did however take a look at it, and, as with any religious cult trying to get the cultists riled up, it sure leaves a great deal out. Chock full of emotionally loaded words like flagrant aggressor and utterly lacking in substance.

            You’ll have to do better if you want to rile people up to join your Trotskyite movement.

            1. er.. I took a look at various articles on Iran on the website I mean…

    2. Since when has logic been a facet of Islamofascism?

      1. Or, for that matter, the people who use that word?

        1. You’re not one of those people who’s unwittingly relativistic in his view of culture and right and wrong, are you? You’re not one of those people that’s of the belief that Islam is a religion of peace, are you?

          If you’re not, and your response was triggered by the assumption that I’m some sort of Bible-thumper/neoconservative, rest easy — I’m a strict non-interventionist who believes in trade with all, binding alliance with none, and strong military power solely for the purpose of defense. Now that that’s cleared up, I feel all better.

        2. Islamofascism is a nice, though obvious, bit of political rhetoric designed to further the narrative that all Arab and Persian countries are run by leaders who are just like Hitler and Benito M.

          Why u no like manipulative language?

          1. Pull that out of your ass, did ya?

            1. Pull that out of your ass, did ya?

              Nope. I just observed how no one used the word before a few years ago. Before it was “terrorists” and “Islamic extremists” and “Islamic militants”. Then came the meme that Suddam Hussein was just like Hitler (a ludicrous comparison) and those who didn’t want to invade Iraq were just like Nevil Chamberlain. After that, I suppose, it was only natural for someone to come up with a word or catch phrase to further tie the bad guys to Hitler. “Islamofascism” is good, too, because it ties into the meme about the desire of Muslims for another Holocaust.

              The language masters haven’t been able to give “homicide bombers” any real traction, though.

              1. “Then came the meme that Suddam Hussein was just like Hitler”

                In terms of success, maybe. But Baathism was a variant of fascism, was it not? Tying Hussein to Islam is more problematic than tying him to fascism.

                1. Hussein, at least according to some media reports, was a big fan of Stalin’s methods of political control.

                  Doesn’t really matter anyway. There are a bunch of countries which have or had governments which could be described as fascist. That doesn’t mean that their leaders were like Hitler.

                  Hitler was in control of the 2nd (1st in the minds of some) most technologically advanced country in the world, a country with a large, well-motivated population, a powerful industrial base, considerable natural resources, state-of-the-art understanding of military tactics, the most powerful air force in the world and a very strong military tradition. In addition, Hitler’s Germany was capable of directly striking in a significant way at a lot of major American interests. Does that sound much like Hussein’s Iraq?

                  1. None of this really matters. ‘Islamofascism’ is a nice and obvious way of describing a system of government that uses dictatorial means to enforce strict religious tenets on a people.

                    1. What, theocracy wasn’t good enough for you?

                    2. Apparently not. It doesn’t convey the idea that there is a “clash of civilizations” afoot, that we are surrounded by Islamists wanting to cut off our heads because we are free.

                    3. It’s more specific. I prefer Islamic Totalitarian Movement it really sums up the goals of groups like Hezbollah and AQ: impose their version of Islam on lots of people.

                2. The CIA put Sadam Hussein in power and helped the Baath party strongly establish itself. so yes they are facists…most peopel the CIA puts in power get special training on how to be a facists.

  7. Well what do you expect us to do? We try to play nice and just put a little climate change cap and trade system in place…but NOOOOO even Ron Bailey is wussing out on this promotion so if we are going to centralize power then we are going to have to start some more wars. Enjoy the next promotion tax slaves!!!!

  8. “…in a world where everyone is (rightly) reluctant to say the words “We should start a war with Iran now”…”

    What everyone? I’ll say it: we need to counterattack Iran now. They are already at war with us. Just because they rely on third-party actors to detonate bombs instead of using airplanes doesn’t make it any less of a war.

    We must support Israel for the triumph of democracy of the Global Caliphate.

    1. Sorry, that last line should have been, “…for the triumph of democracy OVER the Global Caliphate”.

      1. The correction unfortunately doesn’t improve the material much.

      2. I’m all for sending you over there with as much armerment you can carry. Win this war for us Alan!

        Oh, and if you get captured, we’ve never heard of you.

    2. I’ll say it: we need to counterattack Iran now. They are already at war with us.
      ————————–
      aren’t we already doing that in the places where Iran is using 3rd parties?

      1. That’s not enough — we should just abandon our principles and send in the Army. And stay in Iran for 50 years to make sure public school #1242 is built AS PLANNED while we place the next puppet government that’s probably going to start suck awfully the year after we pull out.

    3. Iran’s religious and ethnic differences with the rest of the middle east make it pretty unlikely that they’ll be in any global Islamic empire that didn’t conquer them. But feel free to continue being an idiot.

    4. We need to counterattack the Moors now. They are already at war with us. Soon the Iberian peninsula will fall… the rest of Europe will assuredly follow!

      We must initiate the Reconquest for the triumph of Western Civilization of the Global Caliphate.

      1. Sorry, that last line should have been, “…for the triumph of Western Civilization OVER the Global Caliphate”.

  9. “I always tell Malia and Sasha, look, you guys, I don’t worry about you. . . . They’re on a path that is going to be successful, even if the country as a whole is not successful.”

    –Barack Obama to New York supporters, Nov. 30

    1. Taken out-of-context (he said what he said to let his audience know that he knew that they were thinking, “that’s easy for you to say”), but it is another quote that indicates his political incompetence.

      He is so incompetent as a politician that sometimes it is hard not to think that he is trying to prevent his own reelection.

  10. …for the triumph of democracy of the Global Caliphate

    I think you need to pull the string in your back again. Your initial burst of high-intensity stupid seemed to lose vigor at the end there.

    “Because life is precious… and god, and the bible…”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mav6X49fbTs

    1. I can’t watch the video from here at work, but life IS precious (which is why we must defeat those who do not value it like we do), and God and the Bible ARE some of the fundamental pillars of Western culture and civilization. Even the Founders knew this.

      1. Which is why they mandated the seperation of church and state…

        1. Which is why they mandated the seperation of church and state…

          Gawd, educate yourself a little, won’t you?

          The anti-establishment clause and the no religious test for office clause were to prevent the political disenfranchisement of those in society who didn’t happen to belong to a particular faction defined by a particular sect which happened to hold power. It wasn’t because they wanted to marginalize those icky Christians and all that they stood for.

      2. You are an absolutely evil scumbag.

      3. Also, children.

        Which is why we must bomb Iran.

      4. the Founders, for the most part, were spiritual men. But they were against a theocracy of any stripe. It’s why they put the subject of religion in the FIRST Amendment, saying govt will not establish a church nor will it stop from establishing the church of your choice.

        That’s the thing with you bible-thumpers: you insist that a billion Buddhists must be wrong, another billion Hindus are also wrong, ditto another billion Muslims, and toss in the Jews for good measure over the Jesus debate. Everyone is wrong but you. EVERY civil society believes life is precious; it’s why some Eastern faiths will not so much as swat a fly.

        Faith in a deity, multiple deities, or none at all is not an indicator of superior character. Left unchecked, teh church can be as destructive as any other force. We defeat those who threaten us, maybe even those who threaten our allies, but we do so with a plan and purpose, not signing statements and photo ops. We can let Iran know that the day after it uses a nuke, it is wiped from the map, but that has to be said by someone Iran will take seriously. That will not be Obama. Will Romney do it? Newt?

        1. We can let Iran know that the day after it uses a nuke, it is wiped from the map, but that has to be said by someone Iran will take seriously. That will not be Obama. Will Romney do it? Newt?

          To Newt, that would be unacceptable. We have to wipe Iran off the map the day before they use the nuke. So he told Ron Paul concerning Timothy Mcveigh. If we get hurt, its because we didn’t do enough to make sure we don’t ever get hurt. WE MUST DESTROY IRAN!!

          1. If we get hurt, its because we didn’t do enough to make sure we don’t ever get hurt.
            ———————
            then, by definition, a state of “enough” is unreachable.

        2. Us satanists are spiritual men as well. Dark spirits bitches!!!

          1. At least us satanist and christians can all agree taht bombing children, especially the brown children is the spiritual thing to do.

            Maybe the democrats and republicans can learn from our spirit of comraderie and not let the extremists muck things up.

        3. No, all cultures do not value life. Muslims do not value life like we do, nor to east Asians.

          Islam is a death-cult that encourages suicide bombing. Mao had the complicit willingness of his countrymen to murder tens of millions. Imperial Japan had banzai charges for the Emperor and kamakazis.

          The only consistently pro-life culture is that of Western Christianity. That makes it superior to all others, and it must be defended…agressively, if need be. You can look at Europe right now for the counter-example; they’ve basically just rolled over and let the muslims overrun their countries.

          1. Children’s Crusade.

          2. christians are a death cult that worship a guy who got himself killed on purpose. They place statues and figures of dying men everywhere for the children to admire. The highest value worshipped by christians are those who would kill themselves for the supposed benefit of others…death cult.

            So yes i agree muslims are probably a death cult as well if I bothered to study them…

            I still know lots of nice christians and muslims and don’t want to bomb any of them.

      5. Much of the Founding generation believed that the supreme principles of liberty and justice, and the concepts of embodiment for them in practical government, were rooted in Judeo-Christian thought and morality, and wrote texts, theses, and constitutions upon that premise. Fantastic.

        What the fuck, exactly, does this have to do with how we should treat belligerent Islamofascists? You’re seriously suggesting we start a preemptive war against Iran because “life is precious” and, therefore, we should start wasting unconscionable amounts of resources and suffering the death of American servicemen? Answer these questions, then:

        1) What the hell can those theocratic nobodies do? For all I give a shit, they can all rot in the cesspit of their execrable ignorance. They can murder each other, rape each other, fucking eat each other — and if what they want is to continue doing that to each other until even the fruits of superior civilizations cannot grant their barbarous society any more redeeming qualities, that’s their business. Fuck them.

        The only things these people can claim to be positive about their country are imports from better cultures. They’re worth precisely ZERO attention.

        That’s in case you’re one of those interventionists that believes we should be righting all the world’s wrongs. If you’re just one of the ones that thinks they’re an imminent threat and that we have to strike before the storm comes, then here’s this:

        2) How do you expect a militarily and economically underdeveloped, corrupt, stunted country that’s scarcely a speck of dust in the ocean of power and wealth WE possess to pose a significant threat? They have NOTHING to genuinely threaten us.

        Do you honestly think it’s worth launching another war and spending billions of dollars and losing people in response to a few acts of terrorism and proxy quasi-conflicts?

        1. They have NOTHING to genuinely threaten us.
          The nukes are coming, but the long range missile program has had some ‘accidents’ thanks to intervention…from somebody.

          Do you honestly think it’s worth launching another war and spending billions of dollars and losing people in response to a few acts of terrorism and proxy quasi-conflicts?
          Yes.

          Everything else you said I agree with. It’s too bad Iran’s had it in for the west since 1979. We should’ve invaded then. But we didn’t. I’m not talking about fixing that place. I just want to end the Islamic Republic.

  11. OT: Occupy LA participant caught on tape

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..re=related

    1. An Occupier throwing away a free hotdog? Not likely.

  12. Thank god when Iran finally gets it’s nukes everyone will shut the fuck up about this since we won’t be able to do shit.

  13. Don’t argue with Alan, it is Jim’s spoof troll.

    Sincerely,
    Apatheist the party pooper

    (shouldn’t have given up the gig this weekend!)

    1. Seriously, what the hell did I ever do to you? This shit is comedy gold.

      1. Hey I don’t arrive until you’ve pretty much had all your fun. But I pity them and feel the need to warn them.

        Besides you can just come up with another name.

      2. It is pretty good trolling.

  14. There have been two dozen “accidental” blasts at Iranian nuclear facilities in the last two years, including the one last month that killed the head of their ballistic missle program. Clearly, Israel and/or the US is at war with Iran. (And I agree that they’ve been at war with us for 30 years. Very successfully, too, in part because folks like Doherty don’t think it’s a war if there aren’t Iranian bombers over Topeka.)
    http://www.latimes.com/news/na…..0482.story

    1. Re: Richard,

      And I agree that they’ve been at war with us for 30 years.

      They haven’t been at war with the US for 30 years. There’s a difference between not having diplomatic relations with the US and being “at war” with the US. However, the US has been at war with Iran for 30 years, the shooting down of an Iranian civilian passenger liner being the most notable example of the several acts of war against that country.

      1. the shooting down of an Iranian civilian passenger liner

        Entirely their fault for fighting America. Their proxies like Hezbollah and the terror attacks they undertake such as the TWA hijacking are acts of war, whether Topeka is occupied by the IRGC or not. Glad I’m not the only one to see things for the way they are.

        1. Their proxies like Hezbollah…

          Sounds like Israel’s fucking problem.

  15. As we approach that point it’s important for the United States to remind the world what it means to be a friend and ally of the United States…

    It means: You’re next!

    And if you’re not a friend, it means: You’re next!

  16. I don’t know what should be done about Iran.

    However, on the broader subject of Libertarian love affairs with pacifism:

    East Germany was peaceful.

    Peace is not a goal of mine and do not assign it the same knee-jerk praise that you do.

    Individual rights are a goal of mine. Protecting my way of life is a goal of mine. War is the occasional price of those goals.

    Mindless, herd-like adherence to pacifism is submission. It is collaboration with oppressors and thieves. It is weakness pretending to be nobility.

    Rights, justice, and ways of life are things worth fighting over. No shortages of challengers are forthcoming.

    So, wars should be made when it makes sense to make war – and there times when it makes sense.

    I don’t know that the current situation in Iran is one of them, I’m just saying that you people assign way too high a value to peace.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.