It is argued, on behalf of the regime, that the presence of the Iranian made bombs and explosives does not per se indicate the involvement of the Islamic government in the killing of American soldiers. The presence of Iranian bombs and explosives may or may not indicate that the regime at its highest level is involved in supplying the insurgents with these bombs and explosives. However, at least one thing it does illustrate is the regime’s inability to have controls over such weapons of mass destructions that it either produces or is supplied with from outside. This is exactly the point. Is it not? That should a rogue regime with its track records acquire nuclear technology and eventually nuclear bombs, would it not be possible thatt the nuclear technology and bombs could fall into the hands of some terrorist groups?
Many compare the present situation with the Russians and Chinese supplying of arms to the enemies of the West. This is what they say: When the Russians and Chinese were supplying our enemies we did not go to war with these countries because such attacks on these countries would have been detrimental to us and the rest of the world. We talked to them, negotiated, and eventually found peaceful solutions. Richard Nixon was talking to both the Chinese and Soviets at the same time when we had troops on the ground in Vietnam being killed with their weapons. And eventually the negotiations paid off.
I am not here to argue that America should attack Iran. But rather counter argue with those who argue we should negotiate with the regime. There are a number of factors that are very different this time around that do not seem to be taken much notice of by those who want America to negotiate with the Islamic regime. Firstly, both the Russians and Chinese had full control over their weapon productions and the supplying of these weapons was always endorsed at the highest levels. The communist system should be hailed for their total control over their system if not anything else. Besides, The Russians and Chinese had nuke bombs and surly a war with the Russians and the 1.2 billion Chinese would be catastrophic. This is why negotiations were the most pragmatic approach. The Islamic regime, however, is not in control of its weapons or itself for that matter and most importantly, the Islamic regime does not value life in the same way the Russians and Chinese did and do. It is true that both regimes executed and still do (perhaps more so in China) dissidents but none of them considered sacrificing their country and/or the entire population for their cause unlike the Islamic regime that believes in order to advance Islam, it may be necessary to sacrifice a whole country. This is what Ayatollah Khomeini said and what Ayatollah Khamenei is saying right now! Secondly, at the time of the war in Vietnam, there was not a ticking clock as such. The present situation is a race against the time. The Islamic regime is not far from acquiring enough technology to make its first nuclear bomb and that is why decisions and actions must be taken swiftly and correctly.
As an Iranian, I would naturally oppose any form of military attacks on my homeland, but I do condemn any form of negotiations with the regime that would either prolong or further strengthen their tyrannical rule. I wish those who want the West and America to negotiate with the Islamic regime would also make some references to the suffering of the Iranian people at the hands of the regime.