- May 10, 2006 • 8:57 am PDT
- + responses
Are two hypocrites better than one? The answer became apparent when the President of Iran sent President Bush a letter the other day. They've printed an English translation in Le Monde. You can read if you want, but it's not worth it. You might think that the first official communication between the two countries in decades (and between two countries engaged in a dangerous game of brinksmanship) would contain more substance than the chants you hear at an anti-war rally. Sadly, this is not the case.Clearly, this much ballyhooed letter isn't actually about opening any sort of dialogue, it's a piece of silly propaganda from the Iranian government. I think most of the world has come to accept that George W.'s foreign policy lacks a certain moral cohesion. I don't know that it's worth pointing out to him in a public letter. That doesn't seem very helpful. Some other things the world has come to accept: 1) the Holocaust happened. We're all pretty much down with that. 2) September 11 wasn't the work of government security forces (though it's hard to tell if Mr. President is implying that it was Mossad or the CIA. Regardless...). 3) Israel is here to stay. There will be no wiping off of any maps. And you probably shouldn't count on you winning that war, if you tried. Israel has racked up a pretty record in the "fighting off Islamic countries trying to destroy them" game. Spouting off about this stuff really undermines an argument.
But what most undermines Iran's argument is that it's not as though Iran is in any place to be whining about the United States' hypocritical foreign policy. Everyone knows you're trying to build a nuclear bomb. You are not being sneaky. What could you possibly need a nuclear bomb for? And, of course, there is the whole funding Hezbollah thing. And the repressive, fundamentalist police state. And the kidnapping American diplomats. I guess one hypocrite deserves another. But having them personally accusing each other of hypocrisy is beyond absurd.
