<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title><![CDATA[Comments for entry "Could Iran Become One of the Greatest Countries in History?" at Dilbert.com Blog]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/795]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Regular thoughts and updates from Dilbert.com]]></description>
<language><![CDATA[en-us]]></language>
<generator><![CDATA[VPI.Net MyBlogAbout]]></generator>
<managingEditor><![CDATA[]]></managingEditor>
<webMaster><![CDATA[]]></webMaster>
<ttl><![CDATA[5]]></ttl>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from veti]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1735388]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[It's depressing, how any mention of Iran draws the crazies out of the woodwork.

Scott, your plan is imaginative, but it's not imaginative enough. You devote how much of your time to thinking about Iran's place and role in the world - maybe five minutes a day, on average? I'm thinking probably less. And you think you can come up with a solution that Iranian diplomats and politicians haven't thought of?

It's really not clear what your plan would accomplish, other than making a lot of American politicians and pundits look very stupid. Indeed, thinking about it, I'm pretty sure that's the primary goal. How exactly that would benefit the Iranian nation and people is left as an exercise for the reader.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[MonAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1735388]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Pylon]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734670]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I won't spend time arguing whether or not the solution would work.  As an exercise in creative thinking, it's aces.  And I have to admit I'd kinda be rooting for them to pull it off on a ballsy scale alone.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[FriPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734670]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from uhmdown]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734617]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[@borgsixofnine:
Mahmoud Abbas stated as recent as 2011 that the Arab rejection of the UN Partition Plan &quot;was a mistake he hoped to rectify&quot;. The last half of your post doesn't resonate with that fact at all.
This Arab rejection lead to civil war between Jews and Arabs, and this lead to the establishment of Israel, which lead to Arabs commencing an actual attack. But everybody was already in a frenzy.

Israel has taken its security worries to the extreme since that time. The Israeli land grab first occured after the first phase of the war driven by, I think, both warranted and unwarranted fear.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[FriAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734617]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from borgsixofnine]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734307]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Scott, your idea works exactly as an engineer would see the problem. Its logical and it assumes both sides share similar goals, reasoning and logic. 

Unfortunately Iran is ran by people who believe it is their holy duty to destroy all Jews.

Also there are some flaws in the basic design of your plan. The development of Israel is not debatable in terms of perspective. It is very clearly documented that the UN divided the area of Palestine into Jordan and then Israel and a new smaller Arab nation. Jews purchased most of the land directly from Arab landowners even after it was designated to them and so the myth of displaced people being chased out of their homes is simply not true.

Arab nations attacked Israel and Israel defeated them thus winning more land. They are not occupying anything since no one had claim to the land in the first place since Arab nations refused to compromise on the whole &quot;The Jews get to live&quot; part of the deal.

Arabs never recognized a &quot;palestinian people&quot; until the late 1970's when Arafat realized being a victim worked better than being a blood thirsty terrorist to the UN. Up until that time people were &quot;palestinians&quot; in the same way I am a &quot;north american.&quot;

The problem here is that Israelis and palestinians are not on even ground. You have a pretend people whose sole existence is focused around killing all Jews and a reasonable productive people spending absurd amounts of time and energy trying to convince them to please stop firing rockets at children.

Gaza already gets billions in aid. 

So there is no reason for anyone in the Arab world to &quot;make peace&quot; with Israel. 

This is not France and Germany fighting over rights to bridges. This is a group of countries with the sole purpose of killing all Jews. There is no reasoning here. 

Iran was doing just fine until it elected a nut job who believes he is the messiah. Reason and logic just wont work here. 

The Arab world only responds to force. They do not respect talk or peace making anything. Peace to them means the result of only Muslims being left alive. They make that very clear. 

Our problem is that we try to reason with them as if they were our intellectual and emotional equals. We are trying to convince cave-men through interpretive dance that violence is not the answer.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734307]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from DennisPeterson]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734275]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Not exactly related, but Iran just starting working with a small team in the U.S. on nuclear fusion:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/may/25/iranian-team-collaborate-us-nuclear

http://focusfusion.org/index.php/forums/viewthread/1121

This is an alternative project called Focus Fusion. It uses a device called the plasma focus, and Iran happens to have more active research with plasma focus devices than any other country in the world.

It might be a long shot but if it works, it'll be ten times cheaper than coal, nonpolluting,  nonradioactive, and completely useless for weapons.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1734275]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from RMan]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733834]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Not the greatest in our lifetimes, loans are a sin there unless they dance around the religious rules.  From the Islamic banking wiki: Sharia prohibits the fixed or floating payment or acceptance of specific interest or fees (known as riba, or usury) for loans of money.

No Islamic country is going to become a great country with a crippled banking/finance industry.  Don't laugh too hard, Christianity had the same rule a few centuries ago.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[MonPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733834]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from uhmdown]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733633]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[@ Phantom II
What is it that has you so convinced that Iran is blocking any potential peace deals? That Arafat turned down the peace deal from Ehud Barak? Yasser Araft could have all sorts of reasons of his own. For one, he was stubborn in nature and refused to compromise on Jerusalem. The starting point for negotiations was poor, absolutely, but I don't see how that automatically points to Iran being the one pulling all the strings.

Also, lookup &quot;meir dagan 60 minutes&quot; on youtube. Its the interview with former Mossad Chief, on 60 minutes. He speaks about how Iran is rational, but not based on &quot;western thinking&quot;.

It reminded me: Its going to take extraordinary effort for Iran to be a peaceful hero while their installations are being sabotaged and scientists being assasinated. I'm amazed they haven't gone into a mouthfoaming rage yet.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SunPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733633]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Kuroneko]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733632]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I think they don't trust us and will feel safer with nukes. That way, they figure, we can't push them around cuz they will have nukes.  And they're probably right for the most part.  And there is no reason for any govt to trust any other govt.  Govts are untrustworthy and even good faith agreements today may be broken 5 years from now when power shifts.  This is has always historically been the case and nothing has changed currently.  The guys making the decisions still have food and water so sanctions don't count as much as we wish they would.  Sanctions hurt the poor and powerless people most.  

However, I don't think they really plan to bomb us with the nukes either, just strut around and act like big shots and saber rattle.  Such blustering seems to be a favorite of govts everywhere.  But I don't buy that these people are irrational psycho killers who want to start a war with nukes.  Even in small countries, you have to be fairly savvy to take and hold power these days.  If you are not, someone will take you out, especially in countries known for unstable internal power struggles.  Many of these people may well be evil and heartless but they also must have a reasonable understanding of consequences of foolish actions or they would have been unlikely to make it this far in the first place.
-Eva]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SunPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733632]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from langley]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733613]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Whenever I hear people chew the fat about international politics like this it reminds of the conversations in War And Peace, it's meaningful to the people who have them at the time and yet so irrelevant in the grander scheme of things. Pitiful and admirable at the same time... like kids pretending to be kings.  It's even worse when news commentators do it too.
]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SunPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733613]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from RavenBlack]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733569]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I have to tongue-in-cheek agree with Phantom II's position - I can't imagine the leader of a country being strongly motivated to make peace in the hope of economic power in the face of an &quot;if you don't let us stop you having nuclear capabilities we'll bomb you&quot; attitude. If I was in charge of a country, and another country was doing that to my country, you can bet that the top of my priority list would be &quot;secretly assemble nuclear weapons capability so that other countries can't just willy-nilly threaten us like that any more.&quot;

And since America's majority is like Phantom II, with the &quot;I for one don't want to have to worry about them having a choice&quot;, even if America wasn't making that threat out loud it would still be lurking, and I'd still want some nice defensive mutually assured destruction at my fingertips.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SunAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733569]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from WALTEP01]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733534]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[I stop reading any dilbert blog when I hit the phrase moist robot
Scott adams is far to creative to rely on this trite simplification.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SunAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733534]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from TWE]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733533]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Iran has already been one of the greatest countries in history....it was Persia.   And I suspect they might not be the biggest stumbling block to peace in the Middle East.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733533]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Phantom II]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733530]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Enough niceties.  

We've discussed this before. When you say, &quot;I don't buy the idea that Iran's ultimate goal is some sort of religion-inspired nuclear suicide,&quot; I say, &quot;Great.&quot;  But who cares what you believe?  You believe in global warming, too, even though some little rational side of your meat-robot brain realizes, &quot;Hey, it's only a theory, and what if I'm wrong? We'll have spent billions and billions of dollars for nothing!&quot;

So, good on you, Scott. Glad you have your beliefs.  Now here are mine: if Iran doesn't have a nuclear capability, then I don't care if they want a &quot;religion-inspired nuclear suicide&quot; or not.  It then becomes, as they say, a moot point.  See how my belief leads to a surer result than yours?  Good. You've learned something.

Now, to the rest of your post, comparing your beliefs to mine.  My belief is that Iran has about as much chance of adopting your four points as Hitler did of closing down the concentration camps and stopping the German war machine.  You miss one tiny point: Iran (and much of the militant Islamic world) doesn't want a two-state solution.  They want a one-state solution that doesn't include any Jews.  If they wanted a two-state solution, there'd be one. It's not Israel that is standing in the way.

You may recall when Yasser Arafat was offered virtually everything he'd asked for in return for peace between the Arab world and Israel, and he turned it down.  The only way Iran would endorse a two-state solution would be if they thought it would get them closer to their goal of wiping Israel off the map.

You are well-intentioned but naive.  You fail to look at the motives of those involved, and rather try to ascribe to them the motives you'd like them to have.  This leads to what, to paraphrase the 9/11 Commission's findings, is &quot;a lack of realistic imagination.&quot;  You can imagine the Iranian leadership acting rationally, but you can't project the results of the Iranian leadership acting in a way that is, to us, irrational, but to them makes perfect sense.

It reminds me of the riddle demonstrating how different the abnormal mind thinks. The riddle sets up a scenario where a woman ends up murdering her sister, and then asks, &quot;why?&quot;  Normal people answer incorrectly, but sociopaths answer correctly.  If you view everyone else's motives only from your worldview, your lack of imagination could lead to drastic consequences.  

Iran is not going to play nice unless they're forced to.  They're not going to sing &quot;Kumbaya&quot; and embrace the non-Muslim world with love and comradeship.  They are, under their current leadership, an enemy of world peace, and must be dealt with accordingly.  To do less is to ignore the lessons of history. The free world should never allow another Hitler to rise.  

So I suggest you consider using your imagination more realistically, or at least consider how your beliefs could lead to some horrific results. I, for one, prefer to make sure we don't ever have to worry about what Iran will or will not do.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733530]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from Phantom II]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733529]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Hey, Scott, just wanted to wish you a (belated) happy birthday!  Fifty-five is a good age to be. I'm sure you don't look a day over 40, but hey, how would I know?]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733529]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from chuck.milner]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733507]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[What if Iran is actually trying to keep it secret that it's nuclear weapons program doesn't work?
Remember Saddam's WMDs? He didn't have any, but he didn't want inspectors to confirm this because then his enemies (including those within Iraq) would know he was weak.

What if Iran just can't get their nukes to work properly?  Maybe it's because of sabotage, or the Israel/USA computer virus.  Or maybe even when you know the basic principles, building a working nuke is much more complicated than most people expect.

The next trick is to convince the Palestinian leadership to go along with the plan.  The Palestinians themselves might agree, especially if the money is real and it will improve their lives.  But their leadership has existed entirely on the basis of being at &quot;war&quot; and they aren't any good at governing the &quot;peace&quot;.

It's easy to point out (to both Iran and the Palestinians) that if there was 20 years of peace, the Arab/Palestinian population of Israel would be simple take over the country without a shot being fired. Can they be convinced to wait?]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733507]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from EMU]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733488]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[uhmdown: &quot;Israel wants contant assurance and reassurance that USA has the military option ready to go.&quot;

If Israel did a real deal with the palestinians, including east jerusalem, I at least would have no problem at all with Israel becoming a NATO member. That would probably solve much of israels concerns regarding military options.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733488]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from uhmdown]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733469]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Regarding the ready-to-bomb environment, I think this reflects how USA really is at a loss on how to negotiate with a country that USA isn't trusted and respected by. If it isn't there, what do you think Iran is going to be paying the most attention to, the carrot or the stick? You can't treat a country like some animal you want to domesticate. This has been the problem with all of the past failed negotiations. All Irans hears USA saying is &quot;if you don't do what we tell you to, we'll bomb you&quot;. A prideful country like Iran is never going to yield to that sort of pressure.

But, I have a hard time imagining that USA really is this bad at negotiating. They must know that this can't be the way to do this. So that makes me think that something is forcing USAs hand, and I think its Israel. Israel wants contant assurance and reassurance that USA has the military option ready to go.

If Iran did the big-picture-maneuver, and assuming I'm right that Israel has some kind of power over USA (jewish voters, is my best guess), USA would be forced to keep trumpeting the military option throughout the entire negotiation process with Iran over inspection details.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733469]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from caveat]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733416]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Strongly agree with boingball's observations.

Scott, muslims killing muslims is anti islam but we have seen a lot of that even during Khamenei's time. One can always find justification for actions that go against religion prescriptions.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733416]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from DNA]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733397]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Scott,

Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King would not have supported your deal, given the nature of their movements. 

You can't occupy someone's house and rent it out to them.

Gandhi's peaceful, non-violent, non-cooperation was against foreign aggression. Although he was strongly against Adolf Hitler's ideology and supported the allied forces in the war by allowing the Indian forces to join the British army, in the case of the occupation of palestine he would have supported the Arabs against Israel. He was not the type who would sleep with the enemy. Pleasing the armed man would never occur to him.

If the embargo against Iran is lifted the price of crude will fall below $85 a barrel. That is not something the US cartels can digest in the current recession. The hoax of WMD played out for blocking Iraq's Oil applies in this case as well. Same in Libya.

The real threat to saving the scientific community in the US is from Korea, Pakistan and China where fanatic fear breeds suicide bombers. And all three are nuclear powers.

.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[SatAMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733397]]></guid>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Comment  from BurnEdOut]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733360]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[Evidently !$%* gets filtered out, even where relevant. Let's refer to it as... Corn-ography.]]></description>
<pubDate><![CDATA[FriPMCDTE_Rthth]]></pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false"><![CDATA[http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/1733360]]></guid>
</item>
<pubDate><![CDATA[WedPMCSTE_Rstst]]></pubDate>
<lastBuildDate><![CDATA[WedPMCSTE_Rstst]]></lastBuildDate></channel></rss>
