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

To: Southack
Tempting as it is, I cannot agree with you that Iran is bluffing. One can't be sure as you say, one can only put the probabilities on a scale and by that measurement the notion that Iran is bluffing loses on two counts: first, Iran has very little to gain and much to lose in bringing about a confrontation over nonexistent nukes. By Iran, I mean the mullahs presently in power who can twist the lion's tale easily enough without provoking him. In other words, the mullahs can keep their authoritarian control over Iran by railing against America and Israel without running such high risks. Second, to forgo the quest for nukes runs counter to the essential nature of aggressive Islam which the mullahs who are in control of Iran personify to a man. What does their revolution mean if not the expansion of Islam? The purity of Islam? How better can the infidels be brought to grace then by the nuclear sword?

So, the mullahs are not bluffing or at least, as you say, we must proceed under the assumption that they are not bluffing. What to do about it?

All of the steps which you recite to move us away from Muslim oil dependency are wonderful and they should have been taken in a generation ago but they were not. Now we must wait a generation for their effect, and that is time we do not have. We did not drill and we do not build refineries. Equally, we cannot transition within a generation.

The alternative to doing nothing is not, as you suggest, going nuclear against Iran. I cannot conceive of a bigger blunder. Iran's nuclear potential must be taken out but it must be done with conventional weapons. You cite our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq as potential stepping stones into Iran, and so they are. But in today's age, such bases are less valuable than they were even 10 or 20 years ago. You cite that we have moved the Navy into the Gulf, and so we have. But a Navy can be moved anywhere it is wet and can be positioned in the gulf at will.

The problem with taking out Iran's nuclear potential by conventional assets is that our air power is insufficient to accomplish the task alone, and our ground forces are being wasted in Iraq. By all accounts, we simply do not have the ground forces available to mount a conventional strike. We cannot do it alone with conventional air assets. That is our dilemma and we compounding it in Iraq.

By the nature of democracy, and our alliance with other Western democracies, a protracted boycott or sanctions regime, or blockade, is doomed to failure. Worse, it must ultimately rebound against us and backfire. It will not bring sufficient pain to Iran to cause the mullahs to change their ways but it will certainly break the Western alliance. Whatever is done 'twer better if it were quickly done.

We armchair strategists lack intelligence to tell us how long a grace period we have before Iran gets the bomb. Some accounts say they have one already and some accounts say it must be more than a decade. George Bush will be out of office in about 15 months. I do not share your confidence that a Democrat will have the starch to do what's right. As a matter of fact, I think the odds are long against it. That would run counter to everything the post-Vietnam War Democratic Party stands for.

If we knew that we had 10 years, we could set in train a campaign to undermine the Iranian regime from within. But even if the CIA were to report today that we had those 10 years, given the degree to which the CIA is discredited by its blunders of in Iran, can one steak the very future of America on its findings?

I'm afraid it is up to George Bush and his Christian character.


28 posted on 09/16/2006 2:16:51 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("I like to legislate. I feel I've done a lot of good." Sen. Robert Byrd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: nathanbedford

Interesting...You forgot one reason for the Iranian saber rattling. The Price of Oil and it's effect on western economies. I never seen a figure on the cost of the "Fear Premium" we've been paying for the last 1-1/2 years, but I imagine it must be close to the economic damage done by 9/11.


31 posted on 09/16/2006 3:15:35 AM PDT by Wristpin ("The Yankees announce plan to buy every player in Baseball....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: nathanbedford

George Bush will be in office for another 27 months.


53 posted on 09/16/2006 12:19:41 PM PDT by gogeo (The /sarc tag is a form of training wheels for those unable to discern intellectual subtlety.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

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