TEHRAN, Iran – The head of Iran’s security council said Tuesday that the re-election of President Bush was in Tehran’s best interests, despite the administration’s axis of evil label, accusations that Iran harbors al-Qaida terrorists and threats of sanctions over the country’s nuclear ambitions.
Historically, Democrats have harmed Iran more than Republicans, said Hasan Rowhani, head of the Supreme National Security Council, Iran’s top security decision-making body.
“We haven’t seen anything good from Democrats,” Rowhani told state-run television in remarks that, for the first time in recent decades, saw Iran openly supporting one U.S. presidential candidate over another.
Though Iran generally does not publicly wade into U.S. presidential politics, it has a history of preferring Republicans over Democrats, who tend to press human rights issues.
Cute. What better way to cause problems for the Presidential candidate that could militarily attack Iran then to endorse him over the guy who would bloviate and do nothing? The guy who, along with his running mate, has offered to sell nuclear materials to Iran.
If W wins reelection, he will continue with a hard line towards Iran. Kerry will be Kerry, and pontificate on human rights and sanctions, and do nothing. Do not misunderstand me, Human Rights are incredibally important. What we did in Iraq to free those people counts more in my book then for anything else. But, harsh talk has to be backed up by resolve. Kerry has none. If the political winds say “who cares?” you can bet the chateua that Kedwards would forget all about Iran. Allowing Iran to become even more dangerous.
President Bush is also able to keep the Israeli’s from destroying the 3 suspected sites that have nuclear capabilities. An attack by the Israeli’s on those sites could cause more harm to ME peace then anything else, at least in the long run. And perhaps in the short term, as well. War or serious instability (to put it mildly), would cause even more problems in the cost of oil, which could cause a serious downturn in the world financial markets.
However, I reckon there is a bit more to this issue, which did not make it into the AP story.
“It makes no difference for us which of the two parties wins the elections,” Iran’s top national security official Hassan Rowhani (same guy as above!) said in an interview on state television.
The official said a victory in next month’s elections for Bush and the Republicans would also not have much impact on the Islamic republic, arch-foe of the United States.
“We are not afraid of the US even if the Republicans win since, at least in the region, they had found out that aggression and bullying will only result in their interests being threatened,” he added.
Funny how the AP forgot to include those three paragraphs, eh? This should pretty much cap it off:
(From the AP story) Kavoos Emami, another Iranian political analyst, praised Kerry for mentioning the need for dialogue with Iran, and said the Democrat would be better for Iran.
“Bush has insulted Iran more than any other U.S. administration. If Kerry is elected, a U.S. military attack against Iran will never happen or will be a very remote possibility,” he said.
I think Israel will act on Iran’s reactor before the US has enough time to think about what to do.