Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Coming of the Bomb [good read]
The Belmont Club | Jan 17, 2006 | Wretchard

Posted on 01/17/2006 7:10:28 AM PST by 68skylark

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last
The permalink is here.

For more from The Belmont Club, click here.

1 posted on 01/17/2006 7:10:30 AM PST by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

It looks like the future may be bumpy. Military affairs may play a larger and larger role in our future -- our Global War on Terrorism may be just a small, opening prelude compared to the conflicts in front of us.


2 posted on 01/17/2006 7:13:52 AM PST by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

The Dark Ages are looking to make a comeback.


3 posted on 01/17/2006 7:16:00 AM PST by jayef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
Even after September 11 the only question for many was how soon history would return to normal after a temporary inconvenience. Little did they imagine that the expansion of the European Union, the Kyoto Agreements and Reproductive Rights -- all the preoccupations of their unshakable world -- might be the least of humanity's concerns in the coming years.

Pure gold!

To paraphrase a very smart man many FReepers know and love:

The graveyard is full of people who make linear assumptions in a non-linear world.

4 posted on 01/17/2006 7:21:00 AM PST by papertyger (We have done the impossible, and that makes us mighty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
Ultimately, nothing less than creating moderate self-government in Iraq, Iran, and other states in the region will bring lasting peace and nonproliferation.

Actually, nothing less than the discrediting of Islam, on a massive scale, followed up by successful evangelization of the former muslims, will suffice. I suspect that this may happen after Mecca becomes a glowing crater.

5 posted on 01/17/2006 7:21:48 AM PST by TomSmedley (Calvinist, optimist, home schooling dad, exuberant husband, technical writer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

> The basic premise is that it probably impossible for
> the US to stop an Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,
> short of a full-scale invasion.

That might be a useful premise for some war game, but
I disagree with it as a broad conclusion.

If we act soon.


6 posted on 01/17/2006 7:33:09 AM PST by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
There is a pretty big assumption here that Israel won't act....

Mike

7 posted on 01/17/2006 7:37:54 AM PST by MichaelP ("Opportunities multiply as they are seized." Sun Tzu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelP
There is a pretty big assumption here that Israel won't act....

It's my understanding that the Iranian nuclear ficilities are so numerous and so deeply dug in, that nothing short of occupying the country will be sufficient. I don't think Israel can pull that off.

This isni't like bombing a single Iraqi plant.

8 posted on 01/17/2006 7:57:58 AM PST by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

Bump.


9 posted on 01/17/2006 8:08:13 AM PST by Rocko (Liberals -- filled with a compassion you always hear about, but never witness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

Maybe, but Israel might feel that to do nothing is simply too dangerous. At some point, by doing nothing, Iran will have a bomb and soon. To do something, even take out a few critical components, might give them time.

Iran plays a game in which they either hope no one will call their bluff, or they do want someone to try and stop them.

In either case, if you were Sharon's successor, and had to decide now, what would you do?


10 posted on 01/17/2006 11:59:15 AM PST by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

Meant to add:

Either way, it's win/win for the Mullahs. If no one stops them, they have their bomb. If Israel/USA attack, they can crack down domestically and use that as the "I told you so! See why we need a nuke!" moment.


11 posted on 01/17/2006 12:01:19 PM PST by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
...our Global War on Terrorism may be just a small, opening prelude compared to the conflicts in front of us.

I'm not raising all these kids and grandkids so some lunatic can blow them up twenty years from now. We need to get on the stick.

12 posted on 01/17/2006 12:02:32 PM PST by groanup (Shred for Ian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

As I have noted many times - we are in a war for our very survival.

This just further delineates the what and the where.


13 posted on 01/17/2006 12:08:01 PM PST by roaddog727 (P=3/8 A. or, P=plenty...............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

bump to read later


14 posted on 01/17/2006 12:10:05 PM PST by OldCorps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
This conceptual blindness prevented foreign ministries, academics or the United Nations -- the very name a testament to the limits of its sensibility -- from understanding that sub-national units under the banner of a world religion could arise to challenge the established international order. It was simply impossible, and yet it was. In retrospect all the signs were there.

Excellent article, as usual.

However, he himself fails if he believes that Islam will be content with another Cold War or stalemate situation. Either we attack them - represented by Iran - or they attack us, sooner rather than later. Anybody who believes Islam will simply hang out and wait doesn't know the history of Islam, which only retreats to its hole when it gets its teeth kicked down its throat.

15 posted on 01/17/2006 12:12:36 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius
However, he himself fails if he believes that Islam will be content with another Cold War or stalemate situation.

Wretchard has written about this very extensively (and persuasively).

He says there's no way the Islamic world will be content with a cold war-type stalemate. If he doesn't make that point clear in this particular essay, it's probably only because he's made that point so often in his other writing. (I could provide you with links if you're really interested in this.)

16 posted on 01/17/2006 12:16:22 PM PST by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

Thanks, I thought he was being uncharacteristically optimistic on this point. Yes, do send links.


17 posted on 01/17/2006 12:53:39 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark

There's a, pardon, third way.

Through military action you hasten or enable or cause regime change.


18 posted on 01/17/2006 1:31:00 PM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: livius
I think Wretchard's best piece on this topic is The Three Conjectures.

He argues that if radical Muslims have nuclear weapons, the situation will be far different from the cold war. He argues that if Islamic terrorists get nukes, it will be the end of Islam -- either at our hands, or (more likely) from their own errors and internal nuclear warfare.

It is supremely ironic that the survival of the Islamic world should hinge on an American victory in the War on Terror, the last chance to prevent that terrible day in which all the decisions will have already been made for us.

19 posted on 01/17/2006 2:12:41 PM PST by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: livius
The Three Conjectures is really powerful, and I think the second conjecture speaks to exactly the point you raised.

If you like this article, I can also recommend Postscript to the Three Conjectures.

Now it is Islam coming face to face with a challenge of how to handle the true divine fire. And the real dilemma is that the power behind the light of the stars is incompatible with the framework bequeathed by Mohammed. It may be the turn of the Faithful to die by Islam's own hand unless it can listen to the word that speaks from the very heart of the flame.

20 posted on 01/17/2006 2:20:48 PM PST by 68skylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson