Hostages of Iran

Ayn Rand Center's picture
Submitted by Ayn Rand Center on Fri, 2007-03-30 22:20

Ayn Rand Institute Press Release

Hostages of Iran
March 30, 2007

Irvine, CA--"There is a profound, but unrecognized, lesson in the West's weak response to Iran's hostage-taking of British naval personnel," said Elan Journo, junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute.

"The U.K. government and Washington are widely regarded as aggressive defenders of their interests in the face of Islamist aggression. But the present Iranian hostage crisis shows, again, how these would-be defenders of our life and freedom are pathetically timid--while our enemy is shameless and ever more confident.

"Iran is a leading world sponsor of Islamic totalitarianism and has long been waging a terrorist proxy war against the West, through groups such as Hezbollah. In Iraq, Iran's proxies have been slaughtering U.S. and British troops. Iran initiates all of this aggression--to say nothing of its nuclear weapons program--with the confidence that it has an Allah-given right to murder. No surprise, then, that when 15 British naval personnel came near Iranian waters, Teheran took them hostage--and unabashedly demanded an apology from Britain, its victim.

"What has been the British, and American, response to Iran's outrage? What has the West done in the face of such a confidently evil regime? Did Britain give Iran an ultimatum backed by the threat of force? Far from it. With Washington's endorsement, London meekly protested, renounced using force to free its troops, and solemnly vowed to pursue 'patient diplomacy.' It has brought up the issue at the international sewer known as the United Nations, London is hoping that the U.N. will condescend to issue a press statement--its weakest possible statement--deploring Iran's actions. But since the U.N. is packed with Iranian allies and sympathizers, even this futile gesture is unlikely to happen.

"What underlies this unconscionably weak response? Fundamentally, it is the corrupt moral principle that dominates the West, the principle that regards selflessness as a virtue and self-assertion in pursuit, and defense, of one's interests as immoral. To punish Iran militarily for its many acts of war would be wrong, it would flout the will of the 'international community,' it would, on this premise, be 'selfish.' It is this premise that inhibits, and thus disarms, the West in the face of the enemy--and, as a result, spurs our enemy.

"While the British may hope that their timid, deferential approach will avoid inflaming the crisis and antagonizing Iran, they are accomplishing the opposite. The spectacle of Western nations bowing in submission is an encouragement to Iran and Islamic totalitarians worldwide.

"Iran and other evil regimes grow stronger and more threatening precisely because the morally good nations, who should defeat Iran's regime, are cowardly, apologetic, and meek."

### ### ###

  

Copyright © 2007 Ayn Rand® Institute. All rights reserved.

Op-eds, press releases and letters to the editor produced by the Ayn Rand Institute are submitted to hundreds of newspapers, radio stations and Web sites across the United States and abroad, and are made possible thanks to voluntary contributions.

If you would like to help support ARI's efforts, please make an online contribution at http://www.aynrand.org/support.

The Ayn Rand Institute, 2121 Alton Pkwy, Ste 250, Irvine, CA 92606 


( categories: )

Disgrace

James S. Valliant's picture

Iran has paralyzed Western leadership, both Right and Left. The Republicans are no better than the Dems here -- or, at least I've seen no signs of it.

In any event, the "battle for civilization" obviously does not hinge on the minor differences between the political parties, as Iran's PR coup shows once more. And, given the recent (if redundant) demonstration that the West can and will do nothing -- no matter what they do -- I wonder what's next from the mullahs?

But I'm glad those sailors and marines are coming home.

Iranian propaganda

Ross Elliot's picture

This is a PR exercise, obviously.

Easter present to the Brits! Well, you can't say President Bachmanturneroverdrive hasn't got a wicked sense of humor.

This release has only one meaning: the West must always negotiate. Negotiation, NOT military action, is *always* the best way. Just keep on talking. Talking. Talking. Make a deal. Compromise. Concede.

Iran releases 15 British sailors and Marines!!!

Marcus's picture

"Iran has pardoned and released the 15 British military personnel seized in the Gulf 12 days ago. At the conclusion of a rambling two-hour speech, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the move was an Easter present to the British people...

The Iranian President interrupted his speech to give bravery awards to three members of the Iranian coast guard and admonished the Royal Navy for sending a female sailor to the front lines. One of the 15 captured personnel was Leading Seaman Faye Turney, a married mother.

"Why is the most difficult task, patrolling in the sea, given to a woman? How can you justify seeing a mother away from her home, her children? Why don’t they respect family values in the West?" He asked the British Government."

Why doesn't Ahmadinejad understand the first thing about the western values of freedom and why is Tony Blair such a cowardly crawler?

"Speaking later in Downing Street, Prime Minister Tony Blair welcomed the sailors' release and said Britain bore the Iranian people no ill will.

"Throughout we have taken a measured approach, firm but calm, not negotiating but not confronting either," he told reporters.

"To the Iranian people I would simply say this: we bear you no ill will ... The disagreements we have with your government we wish to resolve peacefully through dialogue."

Iran releases 15 British sailors and Marines.

Iranian president says he will free sailors.

You're the ignorant one, Fraser.

Richard Wiig's picture

"It was an appropriately staunch attack on ignorants"

Discriminating Your Target

Fraser Stephen-Smith's picture

Easy. The halal food was served owing to cultural cringe and capitulation to the rhetoric of Jihad which demands dhimmitude from us corrupt westerners—precisely the cowardly softcockery that encourages hostage-taking.” (You better f*cking appreciate the efforts that went into that reverse italicization)

You don’t have any proof that was the case, just as I don’t have any proof that the food was served for different reasons. I maintain that my hypothesis (utilitarianism and possibly commercial rationalism combined with benevolence) is lot more likely than the froth-mouthed theories of other members of that debate.  

When the Iranian government and other Islamo-Fascists see that kind of soft-cockery, they are emboldened


It’s true of course. Following a difficult morning for Ahmadinejad, when he realized his hair was styled after the 60’s western beat combo ‘The Beatles’; he was emboldened with the news that Grasmere Primary School was using halal beef in it’s spag bol. “With greater focus on the N16 postcode, we can gain control of the Hackney Empire Theatre in time to get me good seats for panto season!”.

touchy-feely puke about how nice your Muslim neighbours
I don’t have any Muslim neighbours – just very British Penelope upstairs, and her dog Fred. Do you think Fred might be a Muslim? It’s possible of course, but he does chase our cats, and I’m pretty sure they’re not halal.

British Muslims aren’t screaming from the rooftops about how they despise Al Qaeda, the Taleban et al for the same reason that 99% of WASPs aren’t either; they’re uninterested in political debate and focused on buying a bigger house. That doesn’t win them hero points, but it sure as f*ck doesn’t equate them to imminent threats. I certainly wish that they would scream from the rooftops (Well - not in that Islamic call-to-prayer kind of way, but you know what I mean). I will certainly choose to protest even more loudly against wrong-headedness if it somehow attributed to a group I am a member of. That's why I participated more than usual in the halal debate. 

Separately, I agree with Kenny – what was the situation whereby the Royal Navy surrendered its sailors to a tinpot regime?  

Ah, righto Fraser :-)

Lindsay Perigo's picture

How do you get from my position, which is: It is unlikely that halal food was served in a school due to cultural relativism or jihadism - to encouragement for hostage taking, and the parading of prisoners on Iranian television.

Easy. The halal food was served owing to cultural cringe and capitulation to the rhetoric of Jihad which demands dhimmitude from us corrupt westerners—precisely the cowardly softcockery that encourages hostage-taking.

There was nothing "soft-cock" about my earlier attitude. It was an appropriately staunch attack on ignorants implying that the north London school was under the influence of the Taliban. My position points out that you are trying to conflate two separate issues. Once you start attributing the motivations and actions of the Iranian government to all north London Muslims, you lose your credibility.

No one said the school was under the influence of the Taleban. Show me where anyone said or remotely implied that. Point is, it might just as well have been, given the cowardly capitulation that occurred. When the Iranian government and other Islamo-Fascists see that kind of soft-cockery, they are emboldened, as they are by Hillary Clinton, Gore, Obama bin Laden and other Hsiekovian heroes.

This is war, Fraser, and touchy-feely puke about how nice your Muslim neighbours are (why aren't they screaming from the rooftops about how they despise Al Qaeda, the Taleban et al?!) won't cut it in the battle for western civilisation, any more than Peikoff's disgraceful fatwa will.

Linz

Halal Food in North London - Directly Responsible for Hostages?

Fraser Stephen-Smith's picture

This will take some explaining, Mr Perigo.

How do you get from my position, which is: It is unlikely that halal food was served in a school due to cultural relativism or jihadism - to encouragement for hostage taking, and the parading of prisoners on Iranian television.

There was nothing "soft-cock" about my earlier attitude. It was an appropriately staunch attack on ignorants implying that the north London school was under the influence of the Taliban. My position points out that you are trying to conflate two separate issues. Once you start attributing the motivations and actions of the Iranian government to all north London Muslims, you lose your credibility. 

Wimps or idiots?

Kenny's picture

You have to ask how our professional Royal Navy sailors allowed themselves to get captured. They knew they were close to Iranian waters yet it is clear that that they were complacent about the dangers that they faced. They should have been better armed and ready to repel the Iranians by force. They just surrendered.

The big scandal is that our European Union partners have opposed swinging sanctions against Iran. The EU is Iran's largest trading partner. With "partners" like that, who needs enemies? The fraudulent concept of a Common European Foreign Policy is exposed as a sham.

The Iranians released the American hostages just after Ronald Reagan took office - as a direct snub and insult to Jimmy Carter. Perhaps the British hostages will be released just after Tony Blair leaves 10 Downing Street. Nothing would surprise me.

But see Fraser ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... that's what your earlier soft-cock attitude encourages.

F*cking criminal.I can

Fraser Stephen-Smith's picture

F*cking criminal.

I can imagine that we may not have the ability to safely free the hostages ourselves (although we should develop it!). I can imagine that we might have to speak carefully to get the hostages back...before serious retribution. I can't imagine how any UK citizen can hold their bile at the pandering of the EU and UN to Iran's criminality.

There is some disgusting comment in UK newspapers about how the sole female hostage is somehow culpable because she should have been home with her child; plus comment from more squalid vox-pops that Iran's actions are somehow justified, or that we should just apologise to get the hostages back safely. Just disgusting.

At least the Republicans...

Marcus's picture

...know what should be done. Would ARI approve though?

"Britain’s response to the seizure of its sailors and Marines has been branded weak by Republicans in Washington. John Bolton, until recently the US Ambassador to the United Nations, described the Government’s incremental approach as “pathetic”.

He said that Mr Blair should be threatening “real pain, real economic sanctions” unless Iran released the sailors immediately. “Britain has got to be tougher here,” he said.

Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, urged Britain to threaten military force to destroy Iran’s petroleum industry."

However...

"EU foreign ministers meeting in Germany called for the sailors to be freed but ruled out any tightening of lucrative export credit rules. The EU is Iran’s biggest trading partner. British officials are understood to have taken soundings on economic sanctions before the meeting but found few takers.

France, Iran’s second-largest EU trading partner, cautioned that further confrontation should be avoided. The Dutch said it was important not to risk a breakdown in dialogue."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...

Where's James Bond when you need him?

Marcus's picture

Regime continues as it began, with intimidation and violence

1979 Iranian student supporters of Ayatollah Khomeini occupied the American embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. A rescue attempt called Operation Eagle Claw failed when a sandstorm made two helicopters lose their way. The crisis was blamed for Jimmy Carter’s loss of the American presidential election in 1980.

1980s Iran, which helped to found the Lebanese militia Hezbollah, was linked to a series of kidnappings of foreigners in Lebanon, including that of Terry Waite, and to the abduction and murder of Colonel William Higgins, an American marine.

1989 Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for the death of Salman Rushdie, the British author, claiming he had committed blasphemy in his novel The Satanic Verses. The fatwa remains in force because only Khomeini, now dead, could remove it; but the regime worked out an agreement with the British government that it would not be enforced.

1992 Suicide bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina which killed 29 people – thought to be the work of Iran.

1994 Suicide bombing of a Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people and wounded 200. Argentine investigators blamed Hezbollah.

2002 Iran involved in attempt by Hezbollah to smuggle weapons to the Palestinian Authority. A cargo ship was intercepted by the Israel Defence Forces and found to be carrying $15m worth of weapons, including katyusha rockets, antitank missiles, mortars and land mines.

2004 Iran seized eight British sailors and held them prisoner for three days, parading them blindfolded on television and subjecting them to mock executions. The crisis was resolved through negotiation.

2006-7 America and Britain have accused Iran of fomenting violence in Iraq, including supplying sophisticated “shaped” bombs used against coalition troops. A senior British officer last month claimed Iran was paying $500 to agents in the Basra area to carry out attacks.

1979-2007 Many of Iran’s political opponents have met violent ends at home and abroad, including Dr Shapour Bakhtiar, the Shah of Iran’s last prime minister, who was stabbed in his Paris home. Thousands of political dissidents, including many who originally supported Khomeini’s overthrow of the Shah, disappeared or were executed as the regime solidified its power.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.