Posted on 09/17/2007 4:28:52 PM PDT by Fitzcarraldo
WASHINGTON - Every effort should be made to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but failing that, the world could live with a nuclear-armed regime in Tehran, a recently retired commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Monday.
John Abizaid, the retired Army general who headed Central Command for nearly four years, said he was confident that if Iran gained nuclear arms, the United States could deter it from using them.
"Iran is not a suicide nation," he said. "I mean, they may have some people in charge that don't appear to be rational, but I doubt that the Iranians intend to attack us with a nuclear weapon."
The Iranians are aware, he said, that the United States has a far superior military capability.
"I believe that we have the power to deter Iran, should it become nuclear," he said, referring to the theory that Iran would not risk a catastrophic retaliatory strike by using a nuclear weapon against the United States.
"There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran," Abizaid said in remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. "Let's face it, we lived with a nuclear Soviet Union, we've lived with a nuclear China, and we're living with (other) nuclear powers as well."
He stressed that he was expressing his personal opinion and that none of his remarks were based on his previous experience with U.S. contingency plans for potential military action against Iran.
Abizaid stressed the dangers of allowing more and more nations to build a nuclear arsenal. And while he said it is likely that Iran will make a technological breakthrough to obtain a nuclear bomb, "it's not inevitable."
Iran says its nuclear program is strictly for energy resources, not to build weapons.
Abizaid suggested military action to pre-empt Iran's nuclear ambitions might not be the wisest course.
"War, in the state-to-state sense, in that part of the region would be devastating for everybody, and we should avoid it — in my mind — to every extent that we can," he said. "On the other hand, we can't allow the Iranians to continue to push in ways that are injurious to our vital interests."
He suggested that many in Iran — perhaps even some in the Tehran government — are open to cooperating with the West. The thrust of his remarks was a call for patience in dealing with Iran, which President Bush early in his first term labeled one of the "axis of evil" nations, along with North Korea and Iraq.
He said there is a basis for hope that Iran, over time, will move away from its current anti-Western stance.
Abizaid's comments appeared to represent a more accommodating and hopeful stance toward Iran than prevails in the White House, which speaks frequently of the threat posed by Iran's nuclear ambitions. The administration says it seeks a diplomatic solution to complaints about Iran's alleged support for terrorism and its nuclear program, amid persistent rumors of preparations for a U.S. military strike.
Abizaid expressed confidence that the United States and the world community can manage the Iran problem.
"I believe the United States, with our great military power, can contain Iran — that the United States can deliver clear messages to the Iranians that makes it clear to them that while they may develop one or two nuclear weapons they'll never be able to compete with us in our true military might and power," he said.
He described Iran's government as reckless, with ambitions to dominate the Middle East.
"We need to press the international community as hard as we possibly can, and the Iranians, to cease and desist on the development of a nuclear weapon and we should not preclude any option that we may have to deal with it," he said. He then added his remark about finding ways to live with a nuclear-armed Iran.
Abizaid made his remarks in response to questions from his audience after delivering remarks about the major strategic challenges in the Middle East and Central Asia — the region in which he commanded U.S. forces from July 2003 until February 2007, when he was replaced by Adm. William Fallon.
The U.S. cut diplomatic relations with Iran shortly after the 1979 storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Although both nations have made public and private attempts to improve relations, the Bush administration labeled Iran part of an "axis of evil," and Iranian leaders still refer to the United States as the Great Satan.
(This version SUBS 9th graf, Iran says ..., to CORRECT word to 'program,' sted 'problem'))
PING
PING
Idiot.
“Iran is not a suicide nation,” he said. “I mean, they may have some people in charge that don’t appear to be rational, but I doubt that the Iranians intend to attack us with a nuclear weapon.”
Thank you for your service, General.
I’m glad you’re retired.
Now we know why Iraq was such a mess after the initial invasion.
The good General doesn’t seem to think that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards throught their QODS force are capable or could pass these weapons on to the their client surrogates, hezbollah, hamas, the Mahdi Army, the Special forces.
The more I read about this guy the more I realize that he was the weak link in the chain-of-command.
He has a point. It’s the delivery of nuke warheads to clients like Syria that might be a problem until the coordinates are established. Five minutes, no problem.
The general is confusing the attitudes of the Iranian people with its leadership.
No, the Iranian people would not attack us. But they’re not the ones with the nukes.
Sounds like a disciple of Colin Powell. I'm glad they are both retired, but like Greenspan, they can still damage American interests by opening their mouths!
And they'd never think of flying planes into our buildings or supplying Al Queda with IED's or missiles to kill our soldiers.
Where do we keep getting these idiots?
Ithink it shows why he was surprised when Iraq almost fell apart after the bombing of the Golden Mosque. He didn’t know how to deal with fanatics. So he allows a nutjob like Sadr to survive and why he expected Sadr to evolve into a political leader.
Ithink it shows why he was surprised when Iraq almost fell apart after the bombing of the Golden Mosque. He didn’t know how to deal with fanatics. So he allows a nutjob like Sadr to survive and why he expected Sadr to evolve into a political leader.
Oyvey. It isn't Iran's launching nuke tipped ICBM's that we have to worry about. It's Iran's relationship with terrorist networks.
What is the matter with Americas former Generals?
I’m one who finds it difficult to believe Iran would attack a nuclear armed state with nuclear weapons.
Your crazed muslim foot soldier sent on jihad might have suicidal thoughts.. the clerics, political leaders and generals back home who are living it up in luxury, with multiple wives; those guys sure aren’t thinking of suicide.
Abizaid is an Arab born of Lebanese Christian parents. He studied in Amman, Jordan. He rose to prominence by virtue of a perception that his arab background would score points with the arab street. Well he’s certainly scoring points in the arab streets today.
I for one wouldn't take the chance of putting our safety in the hands of clerics, political leaders and generals in a terrorist-supporting country who want us all dead anyway. Even if we nuked Iran into oblivion after they have destroyed New York, the fact remains that they have still destroyed New York.
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.