I have been interested in the case of the three American hikers kidnapped by Iran and sentenced to eight years in prison for espionage.
My belief is that they have nothing to do with espionage. Vacationing in Iraqi Kurdistan, they went hiking on a trail recommended by locals, only to be seized by Iranian troops. One suspects they were set up by the very same locals, sold out for a bounty provided by the Iranian army, which is always eager to seize Westerners. Iran has a long history of holding hostages. It is part of their sadistic psychology and dates back to the Iranian hostage crisis. Iran uses these three hikers as a political chip, to say to the world, "look, we caught three spies, we are being vigilant against American espionage, and see how they try to interfere with our country?"
Westerners need to realize that people in other parts of the world do not necessarily have the same moral values as we do. To trust any of the local inhabitants seems unwise. I would not trust anyone within one hundred miles of Iran. I would not vacation within one hundred miles of Iran. Iran must be thought of as a demon with tentacles extending out to grab Westerners and devour them. It is ruled by ignorant tyrants who do not value human rights, either for foreigners or for their own people. The only way to visit Iran is in the cockpit of a bomber jet.
I remember at the height of the Iranian hostage crisis in the 70's, a wit scrawled "Nuke Iran" on a bridge in my city, in a high-traffic area, and the graffiti remained there over a year, to my surprise. I suppose most people did not find it offensive. Eventually it was removed, but not before I had read it about a hundred times over. I thought nuking Iran was not a good idea, but did have some sympathy for the anti-Iranian sentiment. To kidnap hostages, who themselves may have done little or nothing wrong, is a very Iranian thing to do, but it is also dishonorable, and only generates sympathy for the hostages and animosity toward the hostage-takers. It is a counter-productive action that fulfilled a childish need for revenge on the part of Iranians, but spawned hostility in an entire generation of Americans. I wonder if the Iranians realize that in my elementary school, many students wore an armband with the number "50"? To think that such children will forget, even fifty years later, is a bit naive. Not even the Soviet Union provoked such animosity, perhaps because the Soviet Union had a bit more political sensitivity, even though it might have been more wicked on balance.
As things stand now, Iran is more likely than ever to be nuked, because it is developing nuclear technology. They tell the world, "Blame me," which seems most unwise. If in the future, there is any kind of nuke attack connected to terrorists, whether Islamist or not, with or without evidence, all fingers will point to Tehran. Indeed, if in the future, there is any kind of nuclear war, involving anyone, then Iran may well find itself on the short list of targets, whether or not it was initially involved. I find it most unlikely Iran will be left alone in a future nuclear conflict. Perhaps nuclear armament is a source of national pride for them. The Christians have a proverb, "Pride cometh before a Fall." The Iranian elite would be better served fulfilling the promise of their Islamic "Republic." Why they choose to oppress, torture and kill their own people is strange, a symptom of mental instability.
For my part, I can never accept a country that kills gay people for being gay. I will always be against Iran for that reason alone. But Iran is generous. It gives many other reasons. Iran is one of the least lovable countries in the world, although it does rank above North Korea in morality and popularity. North Korea is simply atrocious, ruled by orcs, plain and simple.
No comments:
Post a Comment