Why Obama Should Let Iran's 'Red-State' Die On Its Own

As a million more protestors march on Tehran today, the days of Ayatollah "Falwell" Khamenei and President "Gingrich" Ahmadinejad are numbered. And that means Obama should keep talking to Twitter more than trying to manipulate the Middle East's dynamics, argues a leading foreign-policy expert. These guys could still go nuclear, after all.

Click here to read Tom's Esquire.com column for today.

I think this time around we want readers to both Digg and Tweet it.

Comments

[Louis Heberlein]

Iran is different from Iraq or Afghanistan. It's Persian heritage and conflicts with Greeks and Middle East power guys did not disappear with its adoption of Shiite Islam.

Its reaction to more recent British, Russian and American attempts to make it a vassal state is part of the public perspective. After they broke with US, our use of Saddam Hussein to contain Iran regional power and satisfy Arab Sunni powers put us in their bad guy column for long term.

Remember how they got their youths to walk into mine fields to clear the way for their troops in the desperate Iran - Saddam war. We then looked away as Saddam used poison gas to try to regain victory. On the other hand, they later provided some intel and staging points for our special troops during our Gulf War I. They must have been really angry when we let Saddam's troops use helicopters to murder Iraqi Shiite's who rebelled at the end of that struggle.

Media and politicians need to think back farther than a year or two ... Iranian people do.

Needs to be a self-developed bottom up evolution towards wise and balanced Iranian culture and political process.

[dan Hare]

The analogy of 'red' Iran with Ahmedinejad and Newt in the USA can only be taken to a limited extend.

Newt is far more a champion of free enterprise and actually the antithesis of Ahmedinejad in an economic sense.

Granted, the young, independent, urban voter compared to the rural voters, the analogy works. But a bum wrap in a larger sense.

[Javaid Akhtar]

The idealogical space between the candidates is wide enough for a colour job but maybe the tight political space that is policed over there has distorted a free movement of Reds vs Blue.Mouasavi =Red ( Business)Ahmadinijad=Blue ( Socialist)Supreme leader =red ( religious structure)Students = Blue. ( youthful )Rural crowd = Red ( conservative by nature)Poor Folks = Blue ( socialist by need)

[Brad Barbaza]

Tom, you know I've got the utmost respect for you. I've given away copies of your books, I arranged to meet you, I contribute links, etc.

But the comparison of Ahmadinijad to Newt Gingrich was in poor taste. I know many people won't be offended by it, but I really think it's unfair, even if you were just comparing "political skill". Yes, I know it was a literary thing like your "12 Steps" or "7 Deadly Sins" from Great Powers, but personally, I think it went a bit too far.

You're still the globalization-guru. I'll still read and spread your work. I just wish that particular bit was written a bit differently...

[Javaid]

Political types reflect some basic neuro-architecture in us as the Stroop test on liberals/conservatives demonstrates.6 Billion individual people but only a handful of political types in every political system ( only two political poles ).

I love the way the US is a free market for this...way more than elsewhere ( even though Race is de-aggregating the poles more slowly in some sections of society).