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?"
I didn’t call you a name — you did.
If and when the time comes, I would launch a two-pronged attack.
One, take out Iran president Achma-dina-jahd and his entire war cabinet with a cruise missile. (several actually)
While at the same time, take out as best as possible the top 10 nuclear facilities in Iran.
Let it be known that any Iranian leader who continues on the nuclear weapons pathway will also be taken out at a time "of our choosing."
Your position is initially, that Iran is acting in its own self interest in sending arms to Iraq, just as the United States has acted in its own self interest in sending arms to the Contras in Nicaragua, and the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan. Your position does make sense, from the Iranian point of view, however it clashes with the national interest of the United States, in that the weapons being sent are killing United States military personnel. THAT, is the problem!
To go further however, a powerful point in the article is that Iran has determined that it is in its national interest to develop, and use, nuclear weapons in the Middle East, and against a Unites States Ally! That too, is a huge problem in conflict with the national interests of the United States!
You can keep up the equivalency argument all you want. "We've done it, so they can too." I GAF about equivalency. If Iran intends to nuke Israel, I support a pre-emptive strike. I am an American - and in such a scenario, Iranians are not my equivalent and they are expendable.
I think he will because he doesn't care what the public thinks anymore.
He has nothing to lose. If he does nothing, he (we) has (have) everything to lose and he knows it. He's just playing poker with them right now to buy time. Dovetailing with this are the new guided bunker busting bombs, probably specially designed with the Iranian targets in mind.
Watch for action in 2008 in my opinion. It will be popular because it is the right thing to do and the Dims will say he did it to affect the election as usual.
I didn’t! I just said name calling is for leftards. Not that you are one.
The question is, when would Iran start selling nuclear weapons to Iraq? We are working with the leaders and the people of Iraq now, so that they won’t have terrorist or dictator leaders in the future. However, if we did as the libs want: that is abandon Iraq, that country would collapse and the terrorists would be on the war-path again, killing the Iraqis and any of us who aren’t terrorists. If Iran has achieved nuclear weapons by then, you know that they’d be selling them to the terrorists in Iraq or wherever and they would have them pointed at the U.S. and certainly at the European countries that lay in a closer proximity to them.
We’ll just have to stomp out Iran’s hope of nuclear weapons. I say we use some of our nice bombers to do the stomping. President Bush knows that it wouldn’t be responsible of us to ignore this Akmadinejad’s (I don’t care if I misspelled his name!) despotism. Yes, he looks to me like another Hitler type. Saddam Hussein was a Hitler type, and we know what happened to him.
Iran has made it clear that it wants to destroy the "Great Satan" (the US), its leaders mock the concept of mutually assured destyruction, they are fighting az proxy war in Iran against the US with Iranian special forces killing Americans, and they want nuclear weapons. They are a threat.
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.