Non-interventionism applies to EVERY internal affair of another nation, even internal conflicts where we feel one side is fighting for their basic human freedoms.
I’ve seen a lot of libertarians, both ‘L’ and ‘l’, getting worked up about the ‘crisis’ in Iran and saying we need to support the Iranians and even a few have gone so far as to say our government needs to get involved.
Maybe I’m just a cold, heartless bastard, but I say we need to stay out completely. This is a fight that the words of citizens of another country, particularly one literally on the other side of the world, will have precisely ZERO impact on. Indeed, even the words alone of the Iranian citizens will do extremely little.
As Green Death pointed out in this comment on Jason’s site, unfortunately political power still grows out of the barrel of a gun. IF the Iranian citizens take up arms against their government, they have a long and perilous battle ahead of them – not unlike the battles of our own Founding Fathers in the 1760s and 1770s.
Interestingly to me, Dale Brown has been thinking about these scenarios in his recent few books, particularly Strike Force and Shadow Command. Brown, per his fiction, thinks that the US Government should get involved with extremely high tech spec ops missions at the very least (obviously, since those extremely high tech spec ops crews are his main characters, both the hardware itself and the operators).
I don’t agree with Mr. Brown’s interventionist philosophies, but he WAS thinking about these things, once again, 3-5 years before they actually happened.
Non-interventionism, like so many other things, is easy to do when it is something we don’t agree with at all (such as Iraq). It becomes much harder to do when it involves something we are inclined to support (people rising against tyranny).
But we MUST stay the course and stay OUT of involvement in any form with Iran.
As a Republican who supported the Iraq and Afghanistan missions, I must say that I agree with you. American’s tend to be people of emotions. They see the immediate. They do not think of the future consequences of their actions. The way I see it both men involved in this political struggle are corrupt evil individuals. Moussavi was the FATHER of the Iranian nuclear program. That is not someone that we should be supporting. If American’s would take the time to stop being so self rightous and actually look at the problems in the present and the multiple problems in the future I believe that we would be sympathetic, but not war hawking like we are now.
Personally, I prefer to wait and watch. There is a possibility that real revolution could happen in Iran, something I would gladly welcome for their own sake, but not want our government to encourage on any level. Should it happen, there may be a chance for a nation founded on principles of freedom. I pray that Iran can become a free nation, and I believe the first recognition of a free Iran should be the United States and our allies.
But the moment we step in to “help”, we will be labeled as the instigators in that conflict. We will become even bigger targets for terrorism than we are now, if that’s possible. Iran must make this decision on their own, and while it may be bloody, we have to stay out of it. Not just for our own sakes, but for Iran’s.
May a free Iran emerge out of the ashes, and may freedom emerge where it hasn’t been seen in centuries.