Skip to comments.We should nuke Iran
Posted on 09/02/2006 8:31:20 AM PDT by GMMAC
We should nuke Iran
Saturday, September 2, 2006
By MICHAEL COREN
It is surely obvious now to anybody with even a basic understanding of history, politics and the nature of fascism that something revolutionary has to be done within months -- if not weeks -- if we are to preserve world peace.
Put boldly and simply, we have to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran.
Not, of course, the unleashing of full-scale thermo-nuclear war on the Persian people, but a limited and tactical use of nuclear weapons to destroy Iran's military facilities and its potential nuclear arsenal. It is, sadly, the only response that this repugnant and acutely dangerous political entity will understand.
The tragedy is that innocent people will die. But not many. Iran's missiles and rockets of mass destruction are guarded and maintained by men with the highest of security clearance and thus supportive of the Tehran regime. They are dedicated to war and, thus, will die in war.
Frankly, it would be churlish of the civilized world to deny martyrdom to those who seem so intent on its pursuance. Most important, a limited nuclear attack on Iran will save thousands if not millions of lives.
The spasm of reaction from many will be that this is barbaric and unacceptable. Yet a better response would be to ask if there is any sensible alternative.
Diplomacy, kindness and compromise have failed and the Iranian leadership is still obsessed with all-out war against anybody it considers an enemy.
Its motives are beyond question, its capability equally so. It is spending billions of dollars on a whole range of anti-ship, anti-aircraft and anti-personnel missiles, rockets and ballistic weapons:
The Shahab 3ER missile, with a range of more than 2,000 km, and the BM25 and accompanying launchers, which are so powerful that they can hit targets in Europe. Raad missiles with a range of 350km. The Misaq anti-aircraft missile, which can be fired from the shoulder. The Fajar 3 radar-evading missile and the Ajdar underwater missile, which travels at an extraordinarily high speed and is almost impossible to intercept. The Zaltal and the Fatah 110 rocket, the Scud B and Scud C and the BM25 with a range of 3,500 kms.
Iran is also developing enormous propellant ballistic missiles and began a space program almost a decade ago that will enable it to bomb the United States. It is also assumed in intelligence circles that Tehran has Russian Kh55 cruise missiles stolen from Ukraine which are now being copied in large numbers by Iranian scientists.
Comparisons to the Nazis in the 1930s are unfair -- to the Nazis. Hitler had the French army, the largest in Europe, on his border and millions of Soviet infantry just a few hours march away. Iran has no aggressive enemies in the region.
Its fanatical leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, controls a brutal police state, finances international terror and provokes bloody wars in foreign countries. It is unimaginably wealthy because of its oil revenues and is committed, in its leader's words, to "rolling back 300 years of Western ascendancy" and wiping another nation, Israel, from the face of the earth.
A conventional attack would be insufficient because Iran and its allies seem only to listen to power and threat. Better limited pain now than universal suffering in five years.
The usual suspects will complain. The post-Christian churches, the Marxists, the fellow travelers and fifth columnists. But then, the same sort of people moaned and condemned in 1938. They were clearly wrong then.
They would be just as wrong now.
It's long overdue.
We won't and the left will cause many Americans to die.
Wow ...... and from Canada too.
We should be ready to nuke Iran, but we should not do so until they jump the shark.
Those warmongering Canadians again.
Whether or not we nuke them, we need to threaten or use a major attack on them. Iran and Syria are killing our soldiers and allies in Iraq, and we are on teh verge of being driven out (via the democrats) rather than telling those terrorist states to stop, or else. And I favor early use of the "or else".
You are exactly right except most of the entire world will have many casualties. And Russia and China thinks they are safe. Wait until this "little Hitler"conquers most of Europe. Hitler wanted the world and if they had the bomb, nothing could stop them. This time the bomb will be had by all, and it won't take much. Funny how stupid most of the world is!
There aren't that many(in positions of power) that feel that way here either. History has been a forgetten commodity in our public schools for ages... we are now paying the price for this blatant slight.
Nobody want war but the world also waits to the brink of too late.
Which particular species of shark haven't they jumped? By the time they cross another threshold, it may be too late.
I don't care if we use tomahawks, bow and arrows or nukes, let's just do it BEFORE the nut job gets his filthy paws on his own nukes.
I'm in agreement that the little worm seemingly running things needs to be muzzled .... or planted in the sand.
...but what punishment do we pass on the many Persians that want political change in Iran?
These people are not ignorant sand morons ..... they are attractive, educated and represent a very real and probable stability in the region.
There has to be another way to bury the mini dictator wanna-be than smashing atoms over Iran.
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.