Skip to comments.Kerry and the Iran Surrender Caucus need to get their stories straight
Posted on 05/15/2015 1:47:50 PM PDT by Dave346
One hundred and fifty members of Congress all Democrats and, among them, most of the small group of bitterly anti-Israel lawmakers signed a letter supporting President Obamas diplomatic efforts vis-à-vis the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
Authored by Reps. Jan Schakowsky (Illinois), Lloyd Doggett (Texas), and David Price (North Carolina), the letter exemplifies the hyper-partisanship that has driven the left wing of the Democrat party on this issue even as that wing has cried partisan extremism at the responses from Republicans.
As if trying to prove Churchill right, this Iran Surrender Caucus, whenever presented with a choice between dishonor and war, has chosen dishonor while increasing the likelihood of war.
Whether those choices come from obeisance to the knee-jerk anti-war Left or legitimate agreement with it is immaterial as the results are the same.
Its worth noting that pro-Israel stalwart Democrats like New York Reps. Eliot Engel and Nita Lowey and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (Maryland) did not sign this letter. Its also worth noting that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (California), fresh off being near tears at the insulting condescension of Prime Minister Netanyahus March speech to Congress, did.
Among its many problems, the letter claims, war itself will not make us safe. A US or Israeli military strike may set back Iranian nuclear development by two or three years at best.
And yet, last week, Secretary of State John Kerry told Israels Channel 10: I say to every Israeli that today we have the ability to stop them if they decided to move quickly to a bomb, and I absolutely guarantee that in the future we will have the ability to know what they are doing so that we can still stop them if they decided to move to a bomb.
Today we have the ability to stop them.
What does that mean? Not set them back a few years. Stop them. Is it possible that the Iran Surrender Caucus declaration of the impossibility of military success is based on something other than the actual possibility of military success? Irans air-based defenses are composed of a few dozen F-14, F-4 and MiG fighters of various ages. In 2009, Irans sole AWAC aircraft, an airborne, long-range, early warning command and control system, crashed during a military air show (which tells you pretty much everything you need to know about Iranian air defense).
Since that time, Iran has sought to upgrade its land-based air defense systems to relatively little avail. The recent Russian decision to sell the S-300 missile system to Iran which would constitute a significant upgrade has been delayed and may or may not end up happening. Janes Defence has reported that Iran intends to deploy a homemade version of the S-300 within one year.
The US Navy has carrier-based assets on two carriers in the 5th Fleet, which the commander of the Iranian Navy threatened last year to sink, as well as the assets aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt. Those carriers together contain more combat aircraft than the Iranian Air Force has on active duty. The US Air Force has bases in Bahrain, Turkey, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
In other words, it would difficult to overstate the available American firepower that can be brought to bear against Irans... ahem... defenses.
Iranian nuclear facilities are widely reported (usually by American politicians seeking to prove how fruitless an American attack on Iranian facilities would be) to be heavily fortified; often dug into mountains and covered by dozens of feet of reinforced concrete. One can find experts on both sides of the argument about the probable success or failure of an American strike. What one cannot rationally say is that setting the Iranian weapons program back two or three years is the best-case scenario. That is patently false. A reasonable best-case scenario would be that the program is reduced to rubble.
I dont know about you, but I like our odds.
Perhaps thats what Secretary Kerry meant when he said that, today we have the ability to stop them.
Would there be an Iranian response to an American strike? Assuredly so. Would Iran make use of its extensive network of international terrorist groups to exact revenge? You mean the network that makes fear of an Iranian nuke so entirely reasonable for Americans? Yes, they probably would. Might young Iranians, resistant to the theocratic regime, rally around the supreme leader? Yes, they might.
Those are political concerns. Not military ones. And, if the Iran Surrender Caucus would like to make those arguments, they should give it a try. But they should stop deceiving the American public about our military capabilities simply because they prefer to appease nuclear weapons-seeking state-sponsors of terrorism.
Jonathan Greenberg is a Middle East analyst, public policy expert, and former staffer at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. He is a senior fellow with the Salomon Center for American Jewish Thought.
We can talk all day about Obambi and Kerry reasons for doing this, but major war is coming unless we get a true American back in the White House.
More like the Iran Activist Association, headed up by none other than Valerie herself.
Kerry will be out of office when Iran drops the bomb on us and he’ll say, “I was wrong”, but we are the ones being bombed. I don’t believe this pos nitwit.
By enabling the Iranian islamonazi mullahs to get nuclear bombs and icbms -———Obama - Kerry - Jarrett are creating the next major war, which may very likely begin or include exactly what Iran’s threatened repeatedly — major (nuclear, etc) strikes on USA.
I cease to be able to describe John the Traitor Kerry in words. All that is left is vomit...projectile vomit!
“Kerry will be out of office when Iran drops the bomb on us and hell say, I was wrong, but we are the ones being bombed. I dont believe this pos nitwit.”
Kerry will never say “I was wrong” he never has and he never will, even though he has been wrong for his entire life.
He has no shame, no integrity, and no real ability, other than to pander to the left, and to lie.
yep.....we need to work hard this year...get more to join FR...get folks active.
On the auction block ...
Rights to a HRC interview ...
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.