Posted on 01/06/2006 11:18:04 AM PST by Impeach98
Military strike against Iran may be necessary
-----------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 6, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
In his Fact and Comment editorial in this week's Forbes magazine, Steve Forbes says out loud what many political insiders are thinking: Military action may be the only option left on the table to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapons program.
Forbes recognizes that the options left for the United States and its allies to stop the Iranians from developing a nuclear arsenal are few and far between.
And there should be little doubt that when, and if, Iran develops a nuclear weapon it would not hesitate to use it against either the United States or our allies.
Forbes argument has been strengthened by the news out of Iran this week – all of it very grim.
On Tuesday, Iran announced it would restart its nuclear fuel research program, determined to resume uranium enrichment – a process that would allow Iran to produce fuel for nuclear weapons.
Iran had suspended the program in November 2003 only after satellite photographs had revealed nuclear development sites in the Iranian cities of Arak and Natanz.
Leaders of Western nations have expressed outrage over the resumption of Iran's nuclear program. If Iran doesn't accede to their demands, representatives of European governments have threatened to ask the U.N. Security Council to look into the matter.
The mullahs in Tehran must be shaking in their turbans.
But the situation is much worse than what the Iranians have openly admitted to.
In the past 48 hours, British news outlets have reported on a leaked 55-page intelligence report that indicates that the Iranian regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been secretly working to build a nuclear arsenal.
The British newspaper, the Guardian, says the report cites 16 Russian and 30 Chinese front companies that are at least partly owned by their respective governments which are helping Iran obtain the weaponry materials it needs on the black market.
That might suggest that those European diplomats will meet resistance on any "Shame on Iran" resolution at the U.N. Security Council, where both China and Russia are permanent members and would almost certainly veto any resolution hostile to the Iranian regime, strengthening my argument that the United Nations is a gutless organization (not to mention one with a horrifying history of corruption).
European intelligence reports also indicate that Iran is working to develop missiles capable of delivering a nuclear payload with a reach extending into Europe and Israel.
Such news must be particularly terrifying to Israel, America's strongest ally in the Middle East.
In October of last year, Iranian President Ahmadinejad called for the nation of Israel to be "wiped off the map." A nuclear strike is just one way the Iranian leader could get his wish, and in doing so earn the respect and admiration from millions of Islamic militants around the globe.
"Anyone who signs a treaty which recognizes the entity of Israel means he has signed the surrender of the Muslim world," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying.
Ahmadinejad's view of a war with the West is alleged to have involved direct action against the United States. Several of those taken hostage in the awful 444-day long Iranian hostage crisis claim that Ahmadinejad was one of the hostage takers. The Iranian government denies these charges.
No matter what his involvement was with the hostage crisis, Ahmadinejad's view of history is just as twisted as his political beliefs.
He says that the Holocaust, in which 6 million Jews were slaughtered by the Nazi regime during World War II, is a "myth" and a "fairytale."
The Iranian state news agency, IRNA, reported this week that the response to Ahmadinejad's statements has been "positive."
The fundamentalists who rule Iran do not view co-existence with the West as an acceptable outcome under their perverse interpretation of Islam.
These radicals will continue to support, harbor, fund and embrace the most horrific and gruesome terrorist attacks against innocent civilians in the hopes of bringing the civilized world to its knees.
And one of the means by which they hope to accomplish their goals is by finalizing a nuclear program that has been under way for several years. If they had the opportunity, Iranian agents wouldn't hesitate to detonate a suitcase containing a nuclear device in an American city, killing untold thousands, if not millions.
When President Bush identified Iran as one of the central members of "the axis of evil" he was dead-on right.
The question before us is whether we will wait for yet another meaningless resolution from the United Nations.
Or, do we have the will to strike first to save our allies and ourselves?
If we un-spool the last of our political options and Iran's nuclear program continues, then we have no choice but to take pre-emptive military action to blow Iran's bomb-making facilities back into the Stone Age.
-------------------------------------------------------
RELATED OFFER:
Stand up to anti-military crowd! Fight back by supporting the new radio ad campaign of MoveAmericaForward.org.
------------------------------------------------------
Melanie Morgan is chairman of the conservative, pro-troop non-profit organization Move America Forward and is co-host of the "Lee Rodgers & Melanie Morgan Show" on KSFO 560 AM in San Francisco.
![](http://www.israeli-weapons.com/images/f16i_b.gif")
cd
CD
Cool pic of F16i. I've read that they also have some cruise missiles capable of making an accurate visit to Iranian nuclear facilities.
I'm just thinking out loud. LOL I fully expect them to do whatever is necessary to take the spotlight off of the Ambramoff fiasco. What better way than to wag the dog? Iran's a troublesome situation and they've got to be dealt with. What better way than to take Iran's nuclear capabilities out. What better timing? There will be an uproar from the peaceniks in the US and around the world, but........the spotlight will not be shining on them.......and, we get rid of the Iran situation. Hopefully their population will overthrow the mullahs.....and will become a Democracy. Wishful thinking, but it's definitely a plan that's appealing to politicians who are in trouble. :o)
Let the French do it. All the world, excepting we Americans, would applaud it, despite their failing to achieve any worthwhile end.
10-12 ICBM's loaded with 6-7 MIRVs loaded with neutron warheads each targeting major Iranian population centers and military C&C facilities would end the problem forever.
It would also kill 10-30 million Iranians and leave an eternal reminder to Middle East that terrorism is a BAD thing.
So... What's the down side, again?
It wouldn't be the fallout, as neutron warheads don't produce enough fallout to affect much beyond the detonation zone.
Loss of oil? How so, as the facilities would still be intact and 'clean'... all you'd need to do is sent in crews to operate the wells, pipelines, and refineries.
Oh, happy day!
:-)
And spread nuclear fallout over the surrounding countries, and a large percentage of the world's oil supply. Do you expect those countries and the rest of the world to sit back and take that?
It wouldn't be the fallout, as neutron warheads don't produce enough fallout to affect much beyond the detonation zone.
Yes it would as we don't have neutron warheads on ICBMs. The neutron weapon was seen as a tactical munition, and all the design work done was on warheads for IRBMs and artillery shells. I don't believe that any were actually constructed.
So... What's the down side, again?
10 to 30 million dead seem to be a pretty big downside to me. Not to mention the likelyhood of global economic collapse.
"Melanie Morgan yum-yum"
Here we're having a serious discussion and just look where your thoughts are!! For shame! I know there's a corner around here somewhere...
I agree. I am shocked that they are even getting involved after their dislike for the Iraq war. They sometimes don't make sense. The one more important question is What is American doing to stop Iran. That is the question of the day. So far I have heard we are doing nothing so at least the Europeans stepped up.
Nothing is going to happen until we get Russia and China on our side.
Neither of them want a nuclear Iran either so one day, we have to get a sign-off from them on an overwhelming military strike or even have them participate.
Other than those two options, the only other alternative is to get their sign-off on implementing total UN economic sanctions and hope that in 5 years, the Mullahs power base evaporates and they are booted out by the Million Man March in Tehran.
We are closer. We have far more forces. We have far more legitimacy with the opposition inside Iran, which remembers the US as a staunch ally under the previous regime. In case everybody forgot, this is our mess.
Let me state for the record that Israel will not wait for the approval of Russia & China before Israel launches a preemptive strike to save their nation from nuclear destruction.
I stated neutron warheads...
And as you kindly noted, they are not available for ICBM's, but for IRBM's.
Sooo, launch 20-30 IRBM's instead.
Those have a much smaller explosion coupled with just as much radiation as a standard warhead. So the radiation kills living tissue but leaves the infrastructure intact.
So, no fallout. And decontamination is usually handled by washing with water, so you'd just need to wait for the rain.
Of course, the topsoil would be destroyed via the comtaminated runoff.
As for global economic collapse... how so? Fallout's not an issue, so contamination of the world's oil supply is... not applicable in this scenario.
Rome dealt with Carthage, and likewise, America must deal with Iran. Carthage never became a problem after Rome 'dealt' with it.
We must be as thorough.
Then how are you going to get your 10 to 30 million dead using tiny weapons like that?
As for global economic collapse... how so? Fallout's not an issue, so contamination of the world's oil supply is... not applicable in this scenario.
Who is going to pump your oil?
Major cities... Tehran oughtta be good for 4-5 million, at the least.
Besides, that's where their high government officials work, so...
And Syria is financed by whom?
The truth is that they both need to be taken down. Israel could effectively destroy Syria's armed forces in 2 days at most, and I suspect that this country could do the same to Iran in a matter of a few days at most. This should be done simultaneously.
sun-tzu is right that the best kind of victory is one where you don't actually have to put your soldiers in harm's way...
Syria might go down (or change its behavior) without a fight, but I don't think that this will happen with Iran (though I certainly hope it does). They don't strike me as the type of regime to just roll over and die, especially when their religion encourages martyrdom (of a sort).
I dunno, it worked against Mongo...
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.