Posted on 09/17/2007 10:29:06 PM PDT by freedomdefender
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.
Amen. I hate to say it, but the reason we knew that we could "live with" a nuclear Soviet Union or China is precisely because we understood that their leaders we self-aggrandizing, "more equal than others" Bolshevik atheists who were far more concerned with preserving their power (and staying alive to enjoy it) than, say, hastening the arrival of the 12th Imam. I think General Abizaid's ethnicity (I know, he's of Arab, not Persian, extraction, but from the Mid-East nonetheless) is playing him false on this one. I've seen more than one General Officer miscalculate what the enemy would do based on his perception of what he would do in a similar situation; sometimes you really do have to examine the "worst case scenario".
Fight the war and keep your opinions to yourself.
Any general that doesn't understand that is probably not a very good general.
Total idiot!
With all due respect Mr. Retired General, I do not concur.... having said that, I must add my disclaimer that the opinion expressed by me, is my PERSONAL opinion, and may or may not reflect the opinion of the U.S. Governement Officials(NOT-RETIRED)
personally I am very surprised to hear this from Retired General Abizaid, I have had great respect for him in the past..
Of course we could. I just don't want to be downwind of the fallout.
In his defense, we should note that the world lives with a nuclear armed Pakistan, despite their shelter of extremist elements, despite their non-democratic government, and despite the fact that Pakistan has passed nuclear materials to other regimes including North Korea.
This is meant to be good, because Pakistan is our “ally” in the war on terror.
I understand the “thought process” I just disagree with the conclusion... PERSONALLY that is...
BTTT
This is a great example of the narrow vision of many military commanders...especially those who forgot how to deal with guerilla tactics after arriving in Iraq.
If Abizaid does not understand that the threat is not from a nuclear Iran, but the transfer of technology by Iran to terrorists organizations, then he deserves all the criticism that can be hurled his way.
This is exactly why we need a President with a military background in the coming decade. One who is not afraid of anyone, and has the guts to say what needs to be said, and do what needs to be done.
Amen !
Iran, as well, has expressed more than just a desire to use nuclear weapons. The difference, they are a state actor, not an international movement without the internal resources to build one. Iran has expressed their direct intentions to use nuclear weapons against both Israel and us. Unless there is a regime change, the clock is ticking closer daily to that horrendous moment when Iran acquires them and they empoly them against us at their leisure. We either stop it by changing their regime or we stop it by destroying their program. Anything short of that is playing with our national survival and the survival of millions of our citizens.
"Living with it" means the odds are almost 100% that one day we will be on the receiving end of it. Can we survive it? Perhaps. Should we take the chance basing it on the hope they will act rationally? No.
Iran is already killing American troops in Iraq and doing all it can to destabilize the region and institute a new caliphate. For Abazaid to ignore the stated intentions and ongoing actions of a mortal enemy like Iran is nothing short of shocking. He is falling into the same diplospeak as the handwringers at the UN, the EU, and the worldwide Left.
Someone didn’t get the memo.....
Iran threatens missile attacks on US targets
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1898288/posts
I kind of agree with the guy, and have said as much in the past. Once you go Nuclear, you are now in the MAD party with all the rest. A Nuclear Iran invites itself to be completely annihilated if they did anything stupid. No rational people would do anything stupid.... but.. and a BIG but.. Alot of those folks are irrational, by our standards anyways. That, and I dont trust them to not let some other nutbags have The Bomb. So all in all, I’d rather NOT have a nuclear Iran out there.
Friends, there’s only way to counter this, “Hope is not a foreign policy.”
The very problem with a nuclear Iran is that they don’t pose the same risk as the Soviets who wanted to enjoy life as the elite.
The elite in Iran, the inspired mullah zealots have a completely different concept of themselves and the world and what it should be. They’ve made it completely clear what that amounts to in terms of the world.
It’s hardly reassuring. I respect the general for his service but I disagree.
I don’t think General Abizaid understands Jihad.
This general has a military background. What he said sort of takes guts, because it's so out of line with the mainstream thinking that a nuclear Iran would be a catastrophe we couldn't handle. By saying that this isn't necessarily so, this general had to know he'd be called the kind of names ("senile," etc) that are being hurled against him on this post. So expressing independent thought took courage, in a sense.
a fellow like Abazaid getting to that level is just plain bizzarre
Abazaid is a darling poster child of the "anti war" movement.... he has a long history iof this, add to that he is of questionable patriotic character in my book, seeing he is a first generation import from Saudi Arabia !
a fellow like Abazaid getting to that level is just plain bizzarre, All arabs are smiling backstabbers and that is not "racism" it is a demographic reality
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.