Posted on 09/28/2009 10:19:33 AM PDT by nuconvert
(excerpt)
Pressure, be it gentle or severe, will not erase that nuclear program. The choices are now what they ever were: an American or an Israeli strike, which would probably cause a substantial war, or living in a world with Iranian nuclear weapons, which may also result in war, perhaps nuclear, over a longer period of time.
(excerpt)
At the heart of the problem is not simply the nuclear program. It is the Iranian regime, a regime that has, since 1979, relentlessly waged war against the U.S. and its allies. From Buenos Aires to Herat, from Beirut to Cairo, from Baghdad to, now, Caracas, Iranian agents have done their best to disrupt and kill. Iran is militarily weak, but it is masterful at subversive war, and at the kind of high-tech guerrilla, roadside-bomb and rocket fight that Hezbollah conducted in 2006. American military cemeteries contain the bodies of hundreds, maybe thousands, of American servicemen and servicewomen slain by Iranian technology, Iranian tactics, and in some cases, Iranian operatives.
The brutality without is more than matched by the brutality within—the rape, torture and summary execution of civilians by the tens of thousands, down, quite literally, to the present day. This is a corrupt, fanatical, ruthless and unprincipled regime—unpopular, to be sure, but willing to do whatever it takes to stay in power. With such a regime, no real negotiation, based on understandings of mutual interest and respect for undertakings is possible.
It is, therefore, in the American interest to break with past policy and actively seek the overthrow of the Islamic Republic. Not by invasion, which this administration would not contemplate and could not execute, but through every instrument of U.S. power, soft more than hard.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
There’s a huge problem. I don’t think it’s any accident or coincidence that Ahmanutjob is rattling the swords of war NOW, with the Marxist Muslim (another Jimmah Cahter) in charge. Where was the nut job for the past EIGHT YEARS? Keeping a lower profile, cause he knew that Bush wouldn’t back down from a confrontation, nor would Bush allow the US to lose that confrontation. Nutjob also knew that if it was Carter or Obama, or ANY DemocRAT in the office of CIC, he could be assured of not losing any conflict with the US. The DemocRAT President in charge would assure that, at least.
The problem Zero has is...his loyalties are torn. Whether to cater to the Saudi he bows to....and defeat Iran, or to lose a US war to Iran cause he hates the US. Decisions, decisions....
Obama will make sure we lose in Afghanistan...AND in Iran. He’ll throw anyone under the bus to accomplish his goal of destroying the USA. That’s my prediction.
Bingo.
Worth a try...
I think what's happened is they have reached critical mass with their nuclear program, but with Zero in office, if there was any reticence on their part, it's gone now. Obama is going to make Mogadishu look like one of our finest moments in American history by the time he's done.
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2004-03/a-2004-03-19-8-Full.cfm?moddate=2004-03-19
Are they?
Has he taken any action that forwards the interests of the United States?
Yep. That’s why the sabre rattling has ramped up. The enemies (within and without) of the USA are in a race against time here. They’re afraid that most Americans will wake up, before it’s too late, and throw out the main enemy of America....Zero himself. If or when that happens, the enemies without know they won’t stand a chance of success.
You either didn’t read what I said....or didn’t comprehend it. (or both, apparently)
I’m not so sure about the details of your scenario, but I’m in general agreement with your idea that Iran is much more likely to attack through surrogates than to ever launch a first strike from its own territory. In fact, Iran will go to great lengths to make it look like a terrorist nuke originated from anywhere but Iran. This makes a nuclear Iran more dangerous than any other nuclear state, because the deterrent effect of the idea of mutually assured destruction only works when you know who the perps are. Everyone knows this, that’s why even the Europeans are starting to make some noise that it’s a really bad thing for Iran to get nukes.
Amen. I favor the scenario in “Protect & Defend”.
Israel should blow up all their refineries and oil ports as well, right?
And then threaten to use a neutron bomb on Tehran if Iran attacks Israel. That’s what deterrence is all about.
No. At the heart of the problem is the American left and some Republicans, Eliot A. Cohen among them, who lobby for action and then, once we are committed, undermine our efforts.
Iraq could have been over in 3 years if they hadn't turned on the war.
Goes back before that too. For over half a century, some on the left aided, abetted, apologized for and were on the take from enemies of America. The history of the 20th century is the history of treason.
How they will finesse this with Obama in office, I don't know. But I'm confident if we do take action, America will be slammed by many of the Americans who now are calling for action.
Not making the call to ignore the problem. Iran should have been dealt with years ago. Bush tried to get it started with his Axis of evil speech and the reaction to that was ridicule and accusations he lied.
The writer of this article, Eliot A. Cohen is Exhibit #A in all this. He was vocal in his support of action against Iraq. I agreed with him. Then, once we were committed, once American lives were on the line, he turned on Bush and the war in Iraq. Everything we did was wrong. Bush blundered. Bush was full of happy talk. Bush didn't admit to errors.
So what do we do? Darned if I know. We should end Iran's nuke program of course. But, I suppose, we just have to be prepared now that it is likely Eliot A. Cohen and certain those on the left side will say we screwed it up once we do.
Thank you. I bookmarked that
I keep reading that there will be a “sustantial” or “devasting” war and that this will engulf the region or even the world. I am wondering why there are some who think this. As others have pointed out we are already at war with Iran and have been for 30 years. I am sure they will try and ramp this up if we or the Israelis attack but just what are their capabilities? Are they any more likely than Saddam was to engage us in “the mother of all battles”? I just don’t see it.
I would expect a significant uptick in terrorist attacks in response to a hit on their nuclear facilities. They would probably launch rockets at our bases and Israel and probably with no more result than Saddam. Their air force is certainly no match for ours. Their navy can’t hope to match up with ours. I am doubt their land forces will not do much better than Saddam’s. So how does this turn into a large-scale regional war let alone a world war? I suppose Hezbolah and Hamas would strike at Israel but what’s new about that?
The biggest downside will be a large spike in oil prices. But if the oil shieks boost production even that could be ameliorated. I very much doubt the Iranians can close the Srait of Hormuz for any length of time if at all in the face of determined American naval and air forces.
Other than the timidity and fear of much of the west’s “leadership” I really don’t see anything in the way of a quick, decisive battle if our military is given the needed support. With a dud like Hussein in charge that is a large question.
Ummm....Boom.
He is interested, and feels called, to usher in the Mahdi. Muslim prophecy says that the Mahdi will be ushered in in a time of great war.
Ahmanutjob IS INTENT on creating that war NO MATTER the losses. Those losses will be considered martyrs in bringing forth the Mahdi.
Ahmanutjob isn't dangerous because he HAS nukes and THREATENS Israel and the US out of posturing. Ahmanutjob is dangerous BECAUSE he has EVERY INTENTION of using them.
He KNOWS 1 or 2 nukes won't destroy Israel. He KNOWS Israel will respond IN FULL, destroying Iran. He is counting on, and rightfully so, that with Israels response, Arab neighbors WILL attack Israel.
Israel more than likely would not limit its response to Iran, as it knows that Syria and Libya, and maybe Jordan and Saudi Arabia and possibly Egypt, would most definetly attack. Thus thrusting the entire MidEast into chaos.
Thus in Ahmanutjobs view, ushering in the Mahdi.
It is reported that Ahmanutjob goes to a well and talks with the Mahdi. Thereby inforcing Ahmanutjobs desire to bring about this war.
Thanks for your input. I couldn’t remember Eliot Cohen
He and all the NeoCons were trying to blame any and everyone because Iraq didn't go the way they said it would go.
“As others have pointed out we are already at war with Iran and have been for 30 years.”
No, they’ve been at war with us.
In the end, of course Iran’s military is no match for ours, but they are above Saddam’s, and the regime’s tentacles are very far reaching.
Here’s what we do, we send in a nuke about 20 miles out to sea and let it go off. Then, we give the Iranian people 72 hours to change the country, kill their leaders, and pledge to be a nation of peace or the next dozen or so are coming right into downtown, enough’s enough folks.
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.