BOMB BOMB BOMB, BOMB BOMB IRAN, BOMB BOMB BOMB, BOMB BOMB BOOOOOMB IRAAAAAN, BOMB IRAAAAAN
Posted on 08/13/2007 9:43:19 AM PDT by IrishMike
RUSH: This is interesting. "President Bush charged yesterday that Iran continues to arm and train insurgents who are killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and he threatened action if that continues. At a news conference, Bush said Iran had been warned of unspecified consequences if it continues its support for anti-American forces in Iraq. U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker had conveyed the warning in meetings with his Iranian counterpart in Baghdad, the president said. Bush wasn't specific, and a State Department official refused to elaborate on the warning. Behind the scenes, however, the president's top aides have been engaged in an intensive debate over how to respond to Iran's nuclear program and its support for Shiite Muslim groups in Iraq."
Look, I don't know what the president is going to do, but I'll tell you something here, folks. I cannot see -- and I'm going way out on a limb here -- I cannot see this president leaving office with a nuclear capable Iran. I just can't see it. Not after the sincerity and seriousness in which he has devoted his presidency to the preservation of this country's national security. I just can't see it. I think the president well knows. There are a lot of similarities here. We've talked about this on the program, what the Iranian mullahs are saying and what Ahmadinejad is saying, to what Hitler was doing back in the 30s. It's amazing how history is repeating itself. Back in the 30s, "Hitler's not going to do that. Nobody will do that." They didn't take him seriously, even when he started his march. Didn't take him seriously. Didn't want to face it. That world was just coming out of WWI, memories were still lingering fresh. Nobody wanted to rev back up into that kind of mode.
Here in this country we have whatever percentage the population who has forgotten about 9/11. We have the Democrat Party aligned with the Drive-By Media doing everything they can to convince people in this country there is no external threat to the United States because they're going to get rid of Bush some day. When we get rid of Bush, the world will love us again, including the Islamofascists. But I talked to Norman Podhoretz, who has a book coming out on what he calls WWIV that we're in now with Islamofascists, and he's trying to sound a clarion call. The book comes out on 9/11 by the way. I spoke to him and interviewed him for the newsletter in the next issue, September issue. He is convinced that Iran is something that's going to have to be dealt with sooner rather than later. If we wait until they're nuclear tipped then what do you do? Then the whole recipe for dealing with it changes. He said to me in our interview, "Baby Boomers grew up and they started learning about what happened in World War II and the rise of Hitler and the Neville Chamberlain incident and so forth. They started learning more about it in school. There were frequent movies made, World War II movies. In fact, to this day, movies are still made about the Holocaust. Fifty years after it was over, 40 years after World War II there were young people looking back and saying to people in Europe, "How could you let this happen? How could you have let this happen?"
Norman Podhoretz said to me that his great fear is that in another 20 or 30 or 50 years from now, if Iran is allowed the nuclear tip, people will be looking back and saying, "How could you have let it happen?" Meaning leaders. How could you have let it happen? How could you have let this happen? That's where I answer the question. I don't think George W. Bush is a president who is going to let it happen. So when you got a headline: "President warns Iran, or else," you might say, "Yeah, or else what?" "Stop aiding rebels, or else." Or else what? Well, there is an else. I'm certain of this. Not because of anything I spoke to him about. I was up there a week ago last night, and I was with him two and a half hours. I want to assure you none of what I'm saying right now are his words. He didn't discuss anything militarily about Iran in any way shape, matter or form. This is just my own assessment. I know he doesn't want to be one of the people 30 years from now that people say, "Why didn't you do something?"
As Michael Ledeen always says” “Faster Please”.
God’s blessed us all that President Bush is at the helm today.
He won’t because the American public wants out of Iraq.
BOMB BOMB BOMB, BOMB BOMB IRAN, BOMB BOMB BOMB, BOMB BOMB BOOOOOMB IRAAAAAN, BOMB IRAAAAAN
“Onward Christian Soldiers”
In your opinion, is it in the National interest of the United States for Iran to have nuclear weapons?
Like the cold war, as the military historian Eliot Cohen was the first to recognize, the one we are now in has ideological roots, pitting us against Islamofascism, yet another mutation of the totalitarian disease we defeated first in the shape of Nazism and fascism and then in the shape of Communism; it is global in scope; it is being fought with a variety of weapons, not all of them military; and it is likely to go on for decades.
What follows from this way of looking at the last five years is that the military campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq cannot be understood if they are regarded as self-contained wars in their own right. Instead we have to see them as fronts or theaters that have been opened up in the early stages of a protracted global struggle. The same thing is true of Iran. As the currently main center of the Islamofascist ideology against which we have been fighting since 9/11, and as (according to the State Department’s latest annual report on the subject) the main sponsor of the terrorism that is Islamofascism’s weapon of choice, Iran too is a front in World War IV. Moreover, its effort to build a nuclear arsenal makes it the potentially most dangerous one of all.
The Iranians, of course, never cease denying that they intend to build a nuclear arsenal, and yet in the same breath they openly tell us what they intend to do with it. Their first priority, as repeatedly and unequivocally announced by their president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is to “wipe Israel off the map”—a feat that could not be accomplished by conventional weapons alone.
But Ahmadinejad’s ambitions are not confined to the destruction of Israel. He also wishes to dominate the greater Middle East, and thereby to control the oilfields of the region and the flow of oil out of it through the Persian Gulf. If he acquired a nuclear capability, he would not even have to use it in order to put all this within his reach. Intimidation and blackmail by themselves would do the trick.
Nor are Ahmadinejad’s ambitions merely regional in scope. He has a larger dream of extending the power and influence of Islam throughout Europe, and this too he hopes to accomplish by playing on the fear that resistance to Iran would lead to a nuclear war. And then, finally, comes the largest dream of all: what Ahmadinejad does not shrink from describing as “a world without America.” Demented though he may be, I doubt that Ahmadinejad is so crazy as to imagine that he could wipe America off the map even if he had nuclear weapons. But what he probably does envisage is a diminution of the American will to oppose him: that is, if not a world without America, he will settle, at least in the short run, for a world without much American influence.
Not surprisingly, the old American foreign-policy establishment and many others say that these dreams are nothing more than the fantasies of a madman. They also dismiss those who think otherwise as neoconservative alarmists trying to drag this country into another senseless war that is in the interest not of the United States but only of Israel. But the irony is that Ahmadinejad’s dreams are more realistic than the dismissal of those dreams as merely insane delusions.
Norman Podhoretz
Israel sure won’t let it happen, that’s for sure and we may be working behind the scenes with their people to ensure that if something does happen, it gets done efficiently and below the radar...(like earthquake in Iran sets off nuclear reactors or something like that?)
.
NEVER FORGET
.
The Man who predicted 9/11 =
9/11 Lifesaver RICK RESCORLA, ..R.I.P.
(The Website)
http://www.RickRescorla.com
(The Pictures)
http://www.RickRescorla.com/The%20Statue.htm
(The Rest of the Story)
http://www.ArmchairGeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24361
.
NEVER FORGET
.
I am still waiting for someone to suggest how you do that without starting WWIII. Blockade? Invasion by Sea? Air Assault?
(No Nuclear Option Considered)
I call this new war World War IV, because I also believe that what is generally known as the cold war was actually World War III, and that this one bears a closer resemblance to that great conflict than it does to World War II. Like the cold war, as the military historian Eliot Cohen was the first to recognize, the one we are now in has ideological roots, pitting us against Islamofascism, yet another mutation of the totalitarian disease we defeated first in the shape of Nazism and fascism and then in the shape of Communism; it is global in scope; it is being fought with a variety of weapons, not all of them military; and it is likely to go on for decades.
I guess there's nothing wrong with Iran doing this as long as you don't mind American service people being maimed, mutilated and killed. For those of us who care about those things and who reject any claims of moral equivelence between the USA and the rogue extremist govenment of Iran, it's a big problem and one that I hope we solve quickly. By any means necessary.
Maybe they also refer to the Truman of August 1945.
From a purely American perspective, even if we had the manpower for an invasion of Iran, it's hard for me to justify the cost in American lives, when we have the means of forcing total capitulation at hand.
But to do that, we'd have to give the Iranian armed forces the same choice we gave the Japanese-- orderly surrender or national annihilation.
Not sure anyone in DC actually has the stones for that.
To the tune of “Barbara Ann”
All of Ahmadinejad’s ambitions described are also described in biblical prophecy, except it wouldn’t be Ahmadinejad alone, but a coalition of nations forming a new and final Persian empire, a coalition which Putin is working very hard at being a very large part of.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.