I keep hearing how GOP US Senate candidate Mike McGavick is such a shrewd political operator… how he engineered Slade Gorton’s, triumphant, come-from-behind return to the Senate, and how we shouldn’t underestimate him. And then he goes and does something like this.
Barely pausing to take a breath, Iran announced with defiance that it is pursuing further nuclear capabilities and that it wants Israel wiped off the map.
The international community has rightly turned, for now, to diplomacy, but thus far Iran seems to be growing more defiant. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently said, “Our answer to those who are angry about Iran achieving the full nuclear fuel cycle is just one phrase–We say, ‘Be angry at us and die of this anger.'”
So, what now? More violence? More words? How do we get across to the people of Iran that their government is, by these actions, isolating itself from the world community? How do we make it clear to Iranians that denying the Holocaust is unacceptable?
The answer: soccer.
Don’t bother waiting for the punch line, you’ll never find one. (At least not one McGavick intended.) Writing in The Weekly Standard, McGavick apparently argues that the best way to make Iran “understand the consequences associated with its headlong push towards developing nuclear weapons”… is to ban its soccer team from competing for the World Cup.
Really.
McGavick takes the time to write a major foreign policy piece for a national publication, and this is what he comes up with? The key to heading off nuclear proliferation in Iran is to ban its soccer team from international play? And I suppose, if that drastic measure doesn’t work, then we can resort to nuking them, huh Mike?
McGavick’s proposal not only provides a stunningly simplistic analysis of international diplomacy, it is also utterly ridiculous from start to finish. First, McGavick goes out of his way to reveal that he has played rugby for 25 years… a great line if you’re trying to pick up voters in a bar, but not exactly testament to his foreign policy credentials. Then a full third of McGavick’s 1000-word piece goes on to discuss similar sanctions against South Africa’s rugby team during the 70s — as if that was the key to ending apartheid — while ignoring the fact that the South African sanctions were aimed at the white, minority electorate who held political control, whereas the Iranian people are virtually powerless to remove their hardline mullahs, short of armed rebellion.
But perhaps the most shockingly stupid passage in McGavick’s piece was this:
If they are allowed to play this coming June, Iran will begin the competition in Nuremburg, Germany. Think of it! Nuremburg! In the same stadium, Frankenstadion, where the Nazi youth first practiced how to march in 1931, and right across the street from where the infamous 1937 Nazi political rallies took place, the Zeppelin Field.
It is insane to think that Iran, which has publicly declared that the Holocaust never took place, should play on that field as though nothing is wrong.
Uh… yeah, because you wouldn’t want to um, taint the hallowed grounds of Frankenstadion with anti-semites.
I mean… what the fuck? Sure, it’s not fair to take those couple paragraphs out of context, but they sure as hell come off as a tribute to the glories of 1930s Nazi Germany. You’d think a staffer might have tried to edit this before sending it off to the Standard.
But McGavick’s proposal not only paints him as a foreign policy lightweight (not to mention a lousy writer,) it also suggests a bit of ignorance about international soccer. Iran is currently ranked 22nd worldwide (and on many independent polls, much lower) and had the misfortune of drawing an incredibly tough first-round grouping with both Mexico (6) and Portugal (8).
You want to stick it to the Iranian people? Let them watch their beloved team have their heads handed to them by the Mexicans, followed by a good ol’ fashioned Portugese ass-whooping. The smart money says that two games into the competition, Iran’s World Cup ambitions will be over.
Still, the purpose of art, sports, and cultural exchanges such as the World Cup is to bring people closer together, and McGavick’s call to politicize the games is contrary to the very ideal of international competition. “The goal of Olympism,” explained Baron Pierre de Coubertin, who founded the modern Olympics, “is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of man, with a view to encouraging the establishment of a peaceful society.”
Or, I suppose, we could just follow McGavick’s advice and use it as just another tool in our nearly three-decades-long political spat with Iran.
The only shrewdness I have observed about McGavick is his ability to rip off the shareholders at SAFECO.
I’m suprised Kritol let this pap reach print. After all, these are the same clowns who derided Carter for not nuking Russia when it invaded Afghanistan.
Rugby? Isn’t that an ENGLISH sport? Why did he play RUBGY??? Why not baseball? basketball? or football? Is McGavick UN-AMERICAN? Sure looks like it.
McGavick…isn’t that a SCOTTISH name? Can he prove he is a U.S. citizen? Why hasn’t he volunteered to be fingerprinted? In fact, why have none of the wingnuts volunteered their fingerprints to show their patriotism and their virtuous support for “clean” elections?
Wingnuts. Stand up and be counted!!!! Send your fingerprints to Sam Reed immediately. Don’t vote until he says you can.
1
Ya gotta hand it to McGavick, it takes some shrewdness or cleverness of whatever ya wanta callit to extort $14 million a year in salary from policyholders for delivering the lowest claims-payout-to-premiums-paid ratio of any of the hundreds of insurance companies doing business in Washington!
Hey Goldy, I think McGavick may be onto something … I’d give him a “B” for this one … for these reasons:
1. Unlike Bush and other wingnutty gopers, McGavick is advocating a PEACEFUL resolution to the nuclear impasse; and
2. Iranians take soccer VERY seriously — more seriously than an all-out bombing campaign against their country. It’s one of the worst things you could do to them! It’s worse than stealing their wives, worse than pulling out their fingernails, the only worse thing you could do to them is make Tehran the capital of Israel! So, I think if we threaten to ban their soccer team, the mullahs will think twice about their reckless nuclear ambitions — if they get their soccer team banned, they’ll probably get overthrown by angry mobs and hanged in the public square.
Does McGavick have a secret plan to sell Major League Baseball to India, and make rugby our national past-time?
Slightly off the subject, but an amazing item to me (I followed your link) is that the USA is ranked 4th! How did we ever get that respectable?
How would Ichiro feel about playing for the Calcutta Mariners?
7
The USA does indeed have some good soccerists.
As Alaska’s candidate for US Senate, Mikey isn’t showing much promise.
So … when are they gonna kick McGavick out of the GEORGE ORWELL PARTY for proposing SANCTIONS and a PEACEFUL resolution of Iran’s nuclear ambitions? Clearly, the man is a pacifist and a Jimmy Carter.
GOP = George Orwell Party
Where was he when we needed him in March, 2003…Saddam and Udai would have surrendered unconditionally
As far as the soccer angle goes – Iran may not be that good, but Mexico and the US are both seriously overated in the FIFA rankings.
Not that we are that bad, but we are not the 4th best in the world either and if you think Iran has a tough draw – HA! – then the US drawing the Czechs, Italy and Ghana is an absolute nightmare.
To put it simply, the US could play much better then in the 2002 WC and still not make it out of the first round.
It is always funny how the the Republicans accuse Democrats of not having ideas.
Well, they certainly have ideas, but none that seems to be worth crap in the real world. (I know, I know, facts and reality have a liberal bias.)
The World Cup… seriously? Is that really the best he can do?
I know that international diplomacy takes a lot of effort and isn’t nearly as drammatic as getting flown out to an aircraft carrier and declaring victory 3..4…5..6… years early, but c’mon guys. Maybe you can try something that is likely to work now and then.
It must really piss off conservatives that international sanctions actually did work with Saddam. He didn’t have weapons.
Hey, banning them from international soccer sound a helluva lot better than vaporizing them.
Remeber when Carter boycotted the Moscow Olympics and the conservative loons’ heads exploded? We’re still picking up the debris.
Com’on loons. Defend your guy. Tell us how ‘nuanced’ this policy is!!!!!!
Depose Mossadegh in ’53, boycott their soccer team in ’06. Some blowback. Some policy.
Maybe McGavick should just get Ahmadinejad a nice “Thinking of You” card, draw some pretty little red hearts in it, write that we really like Iranians and want to be friends, and send it to him in a perfumed envelope. That tactic is just as likely to be successful as the soccer proposal, but has no chance of backfiring. He proves, as they all do, that Republicans can’t govern. Hell, there oughta be a bounty on ’em.
Don’t forget the soccer powerhouse Angola!
There is only one way to do away with racism, and that is to stop pandering or giving preference to any particular racial group. Outlaw preferences and do away with affirmative action. Racist groups such as La Raza, NAACP, the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Mecha, the Black Panters, etc. perhaps should not be banned (freedom of association), but they certainly should not be encouraged or supported by any taxpayer dollars.
Yeah, I remember when we boycotted the Olympics…and Ted Turner started up the Goodwill Games. Some years later that event was held here in Seattle, which was one of our shining hours as a community.
Then, a decade or so later, faced with the prospect of hosting the Summer Olympics, our great civic leaders took a deep breath, rolled up their sleeves and…chickened out!
Yea, that would work. Ban them from soccer. Boycotting the Moscow Olympics sure worked to get the Soviets out of Afganistan, right? (Getting their heads handed to them by Islamic Fundamentalists for ten years didn’t have anything to do with it?) (Sarcastic sneer intended, but unable to locate that font in this software program).
These guys just don’t get it. You don’t “confront” Islamic fundamentalism. These guys derive their power base by stirring up hatred of the Israelis and the Americans. When we react, they say: “See, they hate us, just like we said they did. Everything we are doing – suicide bombings, etc. – are in defense of muslims everywhere. Now send us more young men and money so we can defend Islam everywhere”. If they can show pictures of bloody bodies of muslim women and children caused by U.S. bombing, all the better for them. The more we react, the stronger they become. The reason they bombed our embassies, our ships, and the World Trade Centers is that they were trying to get us to react. Our reaction is their goal, not the attack itself. I don’t think we should just take it, but we should be a lot smarter at how we handle this.
The reason the current President of Iran won the election was because of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. If we had gone in and gotten out quickly, we could have limited our damage there. But by building permanant bases in Iraq and giving every indication we are planning to stay there for the indefinate future, and including Iran in statements regarding the “axis of evil”, we gave the Iranian public a reasonable fear that we planned to invade them next. So they elected a hard-liner, someone they felt would “stand up to the Americans”.
I just don’t get why the Republicans don’t understand this. It’s the same tactic they use in elections in the U.S., finding “wedge issues” to motivate their base, and demonizing their enemy.
So the only thing banning Iran from a soccer tournament is going to do is give them one more thing to talk about when they claim that the U.S. and Israel are acting illegally to keep them frustrate their economic and scientific progress.
Don’t forget, the Iranians have done nothing illegal under international law. They have the right to exit the non-proliferation treaty if they choose to do so. The Iranian President is either a certifiable lunatic or simply a fear-monger, but he hasn’t done anything improper, yet. So our talk of bombing and invasion, at this point, seems like rather naked bullying to the rest of the world – especially the muslim world.
Our best defense is to not give them a visable enemy to fight. It worked in Afganistan because the recruited arab fundamentalist fighters found that the regime they were supporting wasn’t all that popular in Afganistan, and that they were fighting fellow muslims, not Americans. Iraq was different. The Bush administration, in its rush to complete “unfinished business” in Iraq, forgot this point, and played right into their hands.
There is only one way to do away with racism, and that is to stop pandering or giving preference to any particular racial group. Outlaw preferences…
I agree, [JCH]. So tell me when we shall stop pandering and giving preferences to white people? I understand they may qualify as a “particular racial group”.
The funny thing about McGavick’s “World Cup Throwdown!” is that the clowns at unSP ATE IT UP! If this is all they have to get excited about, good luck this November!
LIBERALRUBBERNECK EAT SHIT AND GO BARK AT THE MOON
While criticizing Mike McGavick for his soft-line approach to the Iranian regime, Goldy says: “Iranian people are virtually powerless to remove their hardline mullahs, short of armed rebellion”.
What exactly is the Democrat solution to the Iranian problem? Bombs and missiles? Military invasion? Nuclear attack? Blame the Republicans?
McGavick says the Nazis are bad, the Holocaust was bad, and the current Iranian regime is a bunch of anti-Semites who deny the Holocaust.
So what does Goldy say in response to all of this? Goldy says that McGavick is making a “tribute to the glories of 1930s Nazi Germany”!
WHAT AN ARROGANT ASSHOLE! OR SHOULD I SAY HORSE’S ASS?
The beauty of this situation is that Goldy offers no solutions but will be the first to lampoon any alternatives proposed by McGavick.
By the way, the US/Iranian situation spans more than three decades.
Foreign-policy lightweight, indeed.
The Nazi Germany comments go beyond the pale. You are a disgrace to Jews, Goldstein. We’ll attribute this one to “the bravery of being out of range” (to borrow a phrase).
Richard Pope asks:
“What exactly is the Democrat solution to the Iranian problem?”
I dunno, but that is not the point of discussion. Your pathetic attempt at misdirection aside, we Democrats do not control the government-your ilk does. Is McGavick’s proposal meaningful, workable, effective? He’s a fucking republican, isn’t he? If not, let us know. The point at hand is his idiotic policy prescriptions.
“Bombs and missiles? Military invasion? Nuclear attack?”
Republicans, their shameful cowardice during the 1930’s aside, have always eschewed military action in lieu of diplomacy. The list is long: China, Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada (ha, ha, ha), Iraq, and now Iran. This trend was broken only with their uncharacteristic muteness during the Bosnian crisis. Perhaps you could explain that to me, Richard.
“Blame the Republicans?”
That would be a good start.
Richard, Rex, I post for your edification what McGavick wrote:
“If they are allowed to play this coming June, Iran will begin the competition in Nuremburg, Germany. Think of it! Nuremburg!
In the same stadium, Frankenstadion, where the Nazi youth first practiced how to march in 1931, and right across the street from where the infamous 1937 Nazi political rallies took place, the Zeppelin Field.
It is insane to think that Iran, which has publicly declared that the Holocaust never took place, should play on that field as though nothing is wrong.”
Care to explain just what the fuck McGavick was saying here? He’s your guy!
WHAT AN ARROGANT ASSHOLE!
Irrelevant. Out of order. Name calling. You demonstrate only what a true jerk you are, Mr. Pope.
editor’s correction @ 30 above: replace “eschewed” with “advocated”. That is all. Another drink, barkeep!!!
McGavick ain’t my guy. I am disgusted with the current administration, the debt, the consolidation of power, the cronyism and the outright disdain that they seem to have for the electorate. That said, I try to see politicians for what they are and have to offer, despite my knowledge that the Republican stranglehold must be broken.
Here is my estimation of what McGavick is saying. Iran has publicly said that they want to wipe Israel off of the map and that there was no Holocaust. He is remarking on the irony of Iran’s soccer team playing soccer on the same fields where the Nazi movement first flourished. McGavick’s plan is one small but very populist way to show the people of Iran that it is not alright to exterminate people. Perhaps the mullahs will concoct a successful Zionist cover story to feed their people in order for them to understand why their athletes have stayed home. Or perhaps they will understand the truth of the matter. It’s not for me to say. I understand McGavick’s plan but it requires an ideological leap of faith–a requirement that hasn’t served our foreign policy very well lately.
I see no place where McGavick trumpeted any sort of Nazi glory and for Goldstein to try to paint someone as an anti-Semite for their comments is flat out bullshit. Goldstein places politics above all else and this effort plumbs a new low.
The guy is 22 points behind in the latest poll after two big money TV blitzes that were very well timed – so who cares? No money in the world could turn this campaign into a winner now
Hellfire and damnation. I despise Maria Cantwell and wanted to kick her sorry ass out of Washington, DC and out of my life. But, on the other hand, this guy . . . . I hate, hate having to choose between two evils. Why the hell can’t either the GOP or the Dems field a better candidate!
To kill Iranian and Iraqi towel head terrorists I think Jesus would enjoy use nuclear tipped high, low, medium [“J” band homer] Tomahawks with “sat” controlled self correcting guidance. In addition, Jesus would enjoy a few hundred sub, ship, and air launched Tomahawks targeting simultanious military, industrial, and civilian Iranian targets, including nuclear processing facilities and government buildings. No doubt Jesus would freak at the new Seawolf subs, Trident subs, LA Class subs, and I’ll bet he would be amazed at the Tomahawk payloads of B-1s, B-2s, B-52s, and F-111s. Last but not least, God himself would love to see sea launched Tomahawks from Naval DD and CG platforms. CVNs [nuclear aircraft carriers] in “Gonzo Station” [The Arabian Gulf] would also be part of both the initial attacks [ALPHA STRIKES with F-18s [Super Hornets] and lots of hig priority secondary targeting. After the initial raids both Jesus and God would enjoy frequent USAF B-52 Linebacker II strikes to finish any missed targets. Let’s see……..Did I miss anything?? No, but the US Navy [F-18s] and USAF F-15 Eagles are still available for after strike recon, so Jesus could ride “backseat” in a Super Hornet or Eagle to get a great post strike view. Finally, the Iranian oil is now American oil. ALL OF IT!!! Nothing like 99 cent a gallon gas to pump into a 427/400 HP Vette!!!
I agree with Rex, Goldy this is HORSEshit. Maybe McGavick’s suggestion isn’t a GRAND STRATEGY for dealing with Iran, but at least it’s a cultural/diplomatic suggestion he’s making–not a military one. Sorry he’s no saber-rattling Cantwell–I know how fond you are of your candidates “pro-war” votes.
But seriously, what’s with this post and the other? Is this some kind of rebound attempt from your big let-down post on Reichert?
JCH: Another dollar for goldy.
Hey, Anti-Goldy @ 38,
So, have you sign up yet?
I mean, you guys are going to need about 500,000 boots on the ground for your impending Invasion of Iran for the Promotion of Democracy among Brown People who have Oil(r) program.
No time to waste, Auntie, the honor of Frankenstadion is at stake! Our glorious leader needs you to visit a recruiting station today!
Daddy Love,
If you will look closer at your sources, you will see that the actual feed is from a German Socialist website and not the Iranian Student Group that you cite. Further, the translation is actually from MEMRI.
You will see these citations if you scroll to the bottom of the page.
Uruknet is a clearinghouse for some dubious information. Does the connection between Iranian apologists and German Socialists count as reinforcing my point?
Just say that you believe the state of Israel to be illegitimate and be done of it. Let’s not play semantic games about it. The solution to this question of legitimacy must be solved with either an extermination or mass relocation of a few million people. Various accords have been attempted in the last 90 years (if we are going to go back to the Balfour Declaration) and failed. Three wars won and multiple intifada endured by the Israelis have not succeeded in establishing their legitimacy. Therefore, extermination or relocation back to whatever countries the Israelis came from is the only solution. Is this correct, Daddy Love?
Speaking of Iran, what’s to be done about Maria? She’s a cosponsor of Ricky Santorum’s Senate version of the Iran Freedom Support Act. To promote democracy in Iran. We all know what that means.
McGavick? Who cares about McGavick? When is she going to start listening to her constituents? She can start by defining how her views on energy policy dovetail with her actions in supporting undeclared wars. Energy policy and aggression go hand in hand. Where does she stand? If she’s fighting for petrodollars, just give it up and say so. Otherwise, there’s not a dimes worth of difference, as the old saying goes.
Rex –
“If you will look closer at your sources, you will see that the actual feed is from a German Socialist website and not the Iranian Student Group that you cite. Further, the translation is actually from MEMRI.”
If YOU look closer, you will see that they cross-referenced the MEMRI (right-wing Israeli) translation together with the NY Times translation. I really have no idea if these were edited by uruknet, but it seems as though they were being pretty scrupulous about attribution, so I doubt it.
“Just say that you believe the state of Israel to be illegitimate and be done of it.”
This is very funny, all the more because of its error. But I understand why you might think so. When I re-read my post, I realized that my referent was not clear. To clarify: I intended to point out that to ignore the reality that most statements nade by Muslim governments regarding Israel reference their belief that Israel is illegitimate is to speak ignorantly of what is happening there.
But hey, maybe you DID get that.
“extermination or relocation…is the only solution.”
I totally disagree. Your logic does not exclude a myriad proposals that have not yet been tried. I would number among them Israeli acceptance of the Right of Return and Israel departing the West Bank as a “land for peace” solution. These may or may not achieve recognition for israel, but I do not think your analysis rules them out. So no, extermination or relocation are not the only solutions.
Yah…that’s the answer, Mike….which one of your oil buddies came up with that brilliant idea? Or should I say, which one of your oil buddies is paying for it?