While the arguments put forward are thought provoking, let me make one thing clear about the average American living in the middle of America: None of us really care, on a personal level, what happens in your part of the world. We, like you, just want to be left alone to live our lives the way we want. Every once and a while, we would like to learn from you, trade with you and hope you would like the same. But, we would be more than happy to leave you alone and buy all the oil your willing to sell.
The problem with all of this was, and is, what happened on September 11th. For those of you not living here, please understand this attack shattered our psyche. We thought that the world was a nice place where we could buy your products on the open market and we would leave each other alone. Then we were attacked. My friends around the world, we don't get attacked on our soil often. We are not the Israeli's, who are used to terrorism. We are not the British, or the Spanish, who are used to the IRA and the Basq's. When we get attacked WE FIGHT BACK!
So, you can come up with all of your grand schemes of internationalism and "political Islam," all you want but the bottom line is this: If you don't want us in your back yard, messing with the way you live, then muzzle your radicals. Or else, get use to being told what to do. Remember, we have the largest economy in the world and the largest military. Anything you start we will finish.
Have a nice Day!

America has to stop being an outlaw state, claiming, absurdly, by virtue of an untenable doctrine of "American exceptionalism," that it alone among nations can make rules for the rest of the world. No other self-respecting nation will accept that, so the doctrine of American exceptionalism is in fact a recipe for never-ending war, and for the ultimate marginalization of the United States in the world. Any nation that claims a unique right to do whatever it wants anywhere in the world, without any regard for international law -- any such nation is a threat to world peace and will be fought and resisted. Only by acknowledging the necessity of a worldwide set of laws that govern nations' behavior can the United States dig itself out from the mess it is in now. Everyone hates an outlaw bully, which is why a vast majority of humanity today holds the United States in such low regard today. You may see yourselves as saviors of humanity; the rest of the world sees you as a dire threat to world peace, and one that must be resisted and fought at every turn. Become part of the world community and take part in shaping the laws that must govern us all, or prepare for never-ending war with the rest of the world: that is your choice.

Great views.
The world has to accept changes in the region. This also means having an open mind, which is hard to find in Washington.

"Political Israel as a reality".

Well, Islam is not unpolitical as other religions, allthough there are morals etc and the Pope was a political figure too.

Islam as a unifying idea in "the east", like Coca Cola in "the west"?

What will happen to the idea of "freedom"?

Anyway, powerfull parties like Hezbollah are better than nothing.

You say accept political Islam as reality. Fine. Is President Ahmedenijad being politically Islamic when he calls for the destruction of Israel or for Israelis to "pack up and leave?" Iran may want to be treated as a responsible player in the resolution of the problems of the middle East, but this is hardly the best way to go about it.

On the other hand, no country in the Middle East has tried to play an active mature role in trying to bring peace between Israel and its neighbors. Not Saudi Arabia, not Jordan, not Egypt. Not any North African country. Instead they all look to the US.

They can keep looking. The US is simply incapable of making that huge leap of imagination that is needed. Its politics will simply not allow it to abandon Israel. It is not just Bush and the Republicans. Witness the Democrats trying to get President Al Maliki of Iraq to eat his words on Lebanon and Hezbollah. Unconditional support for Israel might as well be written into the US Constitution.

It is up to the Middle East to solve its problems. Until this is realized, Israel will continue to do as it pleases, Hezbollah and Hamas will do what they please.

Civilians and moderates everywhere will pay the price.

"First, accept "political Islam" as a reality in the region."

As much as I dislike the idea of a theocratic state and society, I have to agree with the above idea. It is not because acceptance will suddenly cause a u-turn in the downward spiral of quite a few Muslim societies, but more so the alternative scenarios of international isolation which will only serve to further bolster Muslim extremists. Invasion does not work; occupation only serves to kindle the flame of "Islamic Nationalism" (as we have seen in the occupied territories and to some extent in Iraq).
Engagement, dialogue, and exposure to alternate systems really are the only way, albeit quite gradual and time-consuming, that have a chance of really changing society from within. Their culture may seem backward, barbaric even, to us, but our own ideals and culture may represent a primitiveness and moral decay to them.

When we demonize the other side we drive them away from dialogue and towards a hardening of positions. Look at the political divide in the U.S for example. As a liberal, a lot of the social issues championed by conservatives smack of bigotry, intolerance and discrimination (I am sure liberal values cause are similarly distasteful to conservatives), but it is only by continued engagement that some sort of compromise or unity of opinion will eventually be reached.

>>>First, accept "political Islam" as a reality in the region.

This is a fairly profound statement, and I don't think the author has thought through the implications. Right now, in the West, as well as in the East (like India, China, Australia, etc), there are people who claim that Islam itself is the problem. However, for the most part, such people are being held in check by moderates in these countries, who are hoping that Islamic moderates will hold back Islamism. If the author really wants us to accept political Islam, then because of the requirement of eternal jihad and seeing the rest of the world as dar-ul-harb, it will follow that such a political Islamic entity will be at war with everyone else. People talk about a billion Muslims, but it is easy to forget the corollary : the billion each of Hindus, Christians and Buddhists, not to mention those pesky Jews. Muslim countries have not lately distinguished themselves in culture, science, economics, or warfare. So if it comes to open war, it won't be pretty.

Dear Mr. Ettefagh:
Good words, good thought, but good deed would be lacking for as long as the US House and Senate remain Israeli occupied territories.

The "political" arm of terrorist groups typically represent a poor attempt to legitimize their otherwise ignorant, hateful and unbending militias. Can we really afford to be fooled again? These negotiations will not lead to long-term solutions in that the militias' utlimate goal amounts to the destruction of Israel.

And to say that these militias are simply attempting to ensure that their people are not marginalized is an inherent contradiction. Instead, these malitias have ensured the polar opposite.

While Israel has a vibrant economy, whose firms include the world's largest generic drug maker and some of the world's most best biotech and high tech firms, these so-called "political malitias" have ensured that their "people" continue to live in the middle ages. So, if Lebanon and Israel were to hypothetically be destroyed, who do you think the world would really miss?

The destruction of Israel would have worldwide ramifications, while the destruction of Lebanon clearly would have a much smaller impact.

Hamas and Hezbollah might give people blankets and food. But people don't just need blankets and food, they need hope for a real future. And yet, these militias instead ensure that each future child will be raised in a culture of violence. So let's be honest--without the state of Israel there really is no hope for the middle east region? The Arab states have little more to offer these days than a few million barrells of oil and we don't really then need the "Arab people" to get that oil.... i.e. the value is in the oil--not the people. (How sad and pathetic if you think about it. These nations once were the center of innovation. But our tolerance for these religious fanatics has allowed these nations to become the laughing stock of the world.)

In fact, would we really care about the Palestinians absent the oil controlled by their supporters? We have no problems ignoring Northern Africa, although the AIDS crisis in Africa is perhaps the greatest tragedy of our times. (So take heed Iran and Syria. Your influence will only last as long as Iran has oil and our dependence on oil continues. How long do you think that will last? If anything, you are accelerating our desire to find alternatives and alternative sources. But Israel's influence will only grow because that state provides people with medicine, technology and other things that are not dependent upon minerals--but rather the intellectual abilities of actual people.)

The bottom line is that this world needs to grow up and mindless, adolescent behavior can neither be rewarded or tolerated any longer if we truly do want long-term solutions.

As is, Hamas and Hezbollah have no right to negotiate on behalf of anyone.

Dear Friend,
Iran has two years to get ready for the next administration. Time is valuable. Use it well. It can do nothing with the Bush Administration. You must understand that its political judgment was a casualty of Iraq which was later confirmed by Katrina. Of course an American government can't fail from a vote of no confidence. Instead it grows impotent over concerns with its competence. While Mr. Bush will remain the CEO of the American government he is no longer the leader of the nation. As a result you must be quite sure that any deal, that is reached with the Bush Administration, possesses support on both sides of the aisle in the American Congress. Iran's best policy remains disengagement from the present Administration and extensive planning for the next one. If an American President has not visited Teheran by the end of 2009, if Iran hasn't restored diplomatic relations with the United States by 2010 or obtained full commercial relations by 2012 then I would suggest that your own government has failed you. You really don't want anything to do with this Administration or than wish Dr. Rice good luck. With one of the worst administrations in decades and two elections within three years the face of American politics is changing. What government wants to alienate the next administration by its close ties to this one? There is simply too much bad blood between Iran and the Bush Administration. Sorry but you must take a number and wait your turn.

Get used to terrorists, they are just like everyone else.

Well, that is certainly a point of view.

Just out of curiosity, though, I'd like someone more knowledgable than I to explain just what the Iranian people get from all the money their government has sent to Hezbollah. As I recall some 30,000 people were killed less than three years ago by an earthquake that struck near the Iranian city of Bam. A similar earthquake could take a toll as great or higher today, as I understand things. The thought occurs to me that some of the Iranians inconvenienced by the Bam earthquake, or at risk from another, might appreciate it if the money their government is spending to buy rockets for Hezbollah were spent on them instead.

Perhaps this thought is all wrong, and Iranians are so united in solidarity with the Palestinians, or Lebanese Shiites, or whomever that they are glad to endure a little extra suffering or risk so that Hezbollah can defend itself against the Israelis after it decides to start a war against the Jewish state. Maybe this is just political Islam for you.

The question of what Iranians get out from their government's subsidizing of Hezbollah is a pretty big one, so asking others as well might be considered piling on. Nevertheless....what, exactly, has Israel ever done to Iran to justify the fierce enmity of the Iranian government? Iran has spent a lot of money and effort building up Hezbollah's army -- was Tehran even consulted before Nasrallah decided to begin his war? At least one of the reasons the mullahs have given for subsidizing Hezbollah was their interest as Shiites in the welfare of Shiites in the south of Lebanon; how's that cause doing right now?

Now I'll grant that the clerical core of the Iranian government is helping Hezbollah put up quite a show, and there are probably good reasons for the mullahs to be clapping one another on the back about now. Well, maybe there are good reasons. Maybe on the other hand Nasrallah is the one making policy for Tehran. At any rate it looks to me as if the average Iranian has been having a lot of his money sent a thousand miles away to prepare for someone else's war, a war about which he was not consulted and which profits him not at all. Political Islam doesn't put any food on his table. In the Iranian version of democracy the opinion of this average fellow doesn't matter much right now, but this will not always be true.