Must-Read Article at The American Thinker

Amil Imani posts an important essay, Iranians Are Defiant over at The American Thinker.

I completely support the military effort in Iraq. In fact, before 9-11 I thought that military action against Saddam was overdue. The agreements he had signed after the first Gulf War clearly stated that a military response was the punishment for failing to comply with the UN's stipulations. He clearly failed to comply. For the UN to ever have any credibility, or for it to ever be able to prevent any other nation from committing genocide or war crimes, there had to be action behind the threat. Anyone who has ever had to confront a schoolyard bully knows this. "Stop, or I shall say 'Stop!' again," is a Monty Python routine, not the action of a government that wants to be taken seriously.

Just because military intervention in Iraq was the best and only option at the time, does not mean that it is the best option at all times. The mullahs have never really had a grip on the population like that which Saddam had developed. The Iranian people are not cowed under the heal of a Fascist machine, but are still a proud and independent people.

It's time we supported them.

What kind of actions could be taken diplomatically to make the regime an international pariah? What pressure could be put upon their trading partners to cease trading with them? Could the government of Iraq, which has no reason to wish Iran to be dominant in the region, offer to fulfill the oil contracts that Iran has with China. This would protect China's energy supply, and give the Chinese government the opportunity to defend its own sovereignty. Iran's long-range missiles could reach into China, and another nuclear nation in the East would change the balance of power and could seriously hinder China's plans. Not to mention that China has its own problems with radical Islamic factions.

Has anyone got any plan for leaning on the mullahs?

Now would be the time, guys.