Posted on 02/06/2014 7:35:20 AM PST by LSUfan
Well, the deed is all but done. The Obamanistas have gotten what they wanted all along: a false detente with the Ayatollahs.
John Kerry would have us believe that the Iranian nuclear program has been frozen by the “agreement” he “hammered” out with Iranian negotiators, but the subsequent remarks from Iranian leaders are very telling; they don’t appear to believe that they agreed to anything that truly curtails their nuclear ambitions.
Kerry is lying.
At BEST, this agreement seems to have set back the Iranian nuclear program all of 6 weeks. It is now inevitable that one day we will wake up and turn on the cable news shows and be treated to the news that Iran has nuclear weapons.
Make no mistake, Obama was NEVER committed to preventing the Iranians from becoming armed with nuclear weapons. To Obama’s world view, this is simply a balancing of world power. We have more nukes than anyone, so, what difference does it make that Iran has nukes? (Incidentally, this is essentially the same position that some Republicans, notably Rand Paul, have taken.)
(Excerpt) Read more at iranbulletin.me ...
This is clearly an act of war, and Iran (or most any country) could be expected to react accordingly (but with time to plan, etc.) If it is to be war, better to hit them hard and fast, and try to take out any chance of dirty bomb or chem counterattack as things ramp up.
N. Korea - Iran ....... Apples and Oranges.
There is plenty of food aid to North Korea. The sanctions against N. Korea do not extend to food.
There is starvation in N. Korea that is found in the ‘hostile’ class of the 50 strata songbun system where the hostile class is at the bottom. Starvation of the hostile class is deliberately inflicted by the state which also prevents food aid from reaching this bottom class. The regime wants the hostile class to perish.
The NK hostile class is too small to overthrow the regime in N. Korea whereas in Iran, where 72% of the population is favorable to Americans, starvation would certainly result in an overthrow of the regime and especially quickly if supplied with weapons.
Lighten up, Francis.
> “This is clearly an act of war, and Iran (or most any country) could be expected to react accordingly....”
Who would Iran attack? The US Carrier Group? I don’t think so. Iraq? I don’t think so. Pakistan? Nope.
Iran will attack nothing outside its borders because the Iranian people will not support any such attack unless first attacked within their borders. The only war recourse for the regime in Iran is to plan attacks through their terrorist network which are kept hidden from the Iranian people. But an uprising of the Iranian people will put a stop to any planned terrorist strikes. This is key; to use the Iranian people’s disgust for the mullahs as a weapon in the war. Starvation is the tipping point.
Starvation is always local; people who are starving, who see family and neighbors dead of starvation, cease to care about politics or political reasons given them for the starvation; they only care about finding food and they will kill anyone that gets in the way of their getting food.
It’s not complicated. It’s bitter medicine but will work inside Iraq according to Iranians that live outside Iran.
It is also the best way to conduct a war against the regime in Iran that both preserves the favorable view that the Iranian people hold for Americans and avoids a foreign hot war intrusion on Iranian ground which would only anger Iranians thereby empowering the mullahs.
Well.......I think we all know how this is going to end and for my part, I suspect the sooner the better.
You have a rather peculiar view of history. I'd suggest you read up on the response of the Irish to famine and starvation in 1846-7. And the Ukrainians during the famine and starvation of 1932-3. And the German people in the latter stages of WW II.
Starving people rapidly lose motivation, become listless and passive. It has been thus in every case, from Africa to the real life examples mentioned above. Iran had its chance to rise up when they were well fed. They failed. History says starving them will accomplish nothing. Your theory is at variance with reality.
The French Revolution
The Fall of the Soviet Union
Bosnia
and many others.
You have a twisted view of the response of Germans in the latter part of WWII.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
RON PAUL to DFU on Iowa radio - he would not stop ship with nuclear missiles from N. Korea to Iran WHO RADIO in Des Moines ^ | 1-3-08 | dfu
Posted on 1/3/2008 9:15:39 AM by doug from upland
For those who have doubts that Ron Paul would be an acceptable commander in chief, your doubts would have been absolutely confirmed if you listened to him this morning on WHO 1040 talk radio in Des Moines, Iowa.
He came on Jan Mickelson's show at about 8:50am, Pacific Time. I was the second caller.
After complimenting him on his commitment to the Constitution, I asked a question about foreign policy. If any of you can pull the podcast, you can hear the conversation.
The question went something like this: Dr. Paul, if a shipment of nuclear tipped missiles was heading from North Korea to Iran, knowing the position of Ahmadinejad and the mullahs, would you stop that ship or sink it?
His answer was stunning. He very quickly answwered, "No, why would we do that?" After that question back to me, he commented that there was almost zero chance of that happening. He said that if he knew they planned to use them against us, he would take action. But they know they would be obliterated.
I wanted to challenge him further over Iran's stated goal of destroying Israel, but I was apparently cut off by the host and couldn't do it.
There you go, folks. Dr. Paul is an unthinkable commander in chief.
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.