Posted on 06/14/2010 6:54:56 PM PDT by rmlew
Quietly within the foreign-policy machinery of the Obama administration—and quite openly in foreign-policy circles outside it—the idea is taking root that a nuclear Iran is probably inevitable and that the United States and its allies must begin to shift their attention from forestalling the outcome to preparing for its aftermath. According to this line of argument, the failure of the administration’s engagement efforts in 2009, followed by the likely failure of any effective sanctions efforts this year, allows for no other option but the long-term containment and deterrence of Iran, along the lines of the West’s policy toward the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. As for the possibility of a U.S. or an Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, this is said to be no option at all: at best, say the advocates of containment, such strikes would merely delay the regime’s nuclear programs while giving it an alibi to consolidate its power at home and cause mayhem abroad.
(Excerpt) Read more at commentarymagazine.com ...
For the last 4 years, I have been noting that the Radical Twelvers running Iran believe in purifying the ummah through fire, to bring the Mahdi (Islamic Messiah). I forgot that Ayatollah Khomeini , who did not like the Twelvers, had no more love of Iran:
“We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah,” said the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1980. “For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam remains triumphant in the rest of the world.”
Mutually Assured Destruction is not a threat to these people. To the "moderates" is irrelevant as patriotism is heresy and to the Twelvers nuclear warfare is a dream of immanentizing the eschaton. Adding to this the simple fact that Iranian nukes will lead to Saudi and Egyptian nukes, and nuclear detterence fails. Even assuming a rational Iran, when Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Egypt all have nukes, who gets blamed when NYC goes up in a mushroom cloud? Nuclar war against the US by terrorist proxy becomes a rational option, even if we know the result. Remember, Imperial Japan rationally believed they could neutralize us for 2 years with Pearl Harbor.
ping
I have a good idea about how to purify them with fire...........can you say: E=Mc squared............
It’s amazing to me that anyone in foreign policy circles anywhere can view this development without alarm.
I just got a note today that the Washington Times wants to publish the below letter on their editorial page.
Allegedly peaceful diplomacy will solve the problems with Iran. However, resurrecting Cold War policies for terrorists and rogue states ignores their author’s, George Kennan’s, prerequisites. For him the Marist/Leninist worldview mirrored traditional Russian ruling class neurotic insecurities about retaining power despite archaic, fragile political systems. Kennan believed the Soviets would not pursue the “hazardous, systematic plans of a Hitlerite Germany”, but always seek to undermine Western nations through various strategies short of war. Soviet leadership would not risk national resources and their dominance against adversaries possessing sufficient power, and demonstrating a clear readiness to use it.
Such parallels do not exist for the war on terror in general, or for the current Iranian regime. The massive deaths sought through jihad provide these Islamic fundamentalists both the means and objectives to usher in the Twelfth Imam, while destroying Israel. Their acceptance of violent death dominates allegiances to family, tribe, or country. They see no imperative for retaining a viable economic remnant. Therefore, the deterrent quality of force (mutually assured destruction) becomes useless.
The sanctions are pathetic. After voting in favor, Russia announced there was no problem supplying Iran with an air defense missile system, and additional nuclear power plants.
Victory, and even survival, instead requires vigorous, costly engagement along a full spectrum of diplomacy, including application of espionage and military force. But engagement requires continuous attacks against Iranian leadership, not population. A few willing adversaries must force meaningful forfeitures from this regime, before Israel must again enforce the nuclear non-proliferation protocols.
It's amazing to me how some still parrot the mantra, "McCain would have been just as bad as Obama."
McCain's Surge won the war in Iraq and a McCain Presidency would have taken care of Iran.
In the 22nd Century, America's tombstone may read, "Too Stupid to Survive the 21st Century".
Exactly. The Soviet politburo was composed of rational men. Communists, but otherwise rational. Not so the mad mullahs of the 12th immam. They would consider 3/4 of the global pop being killed off, but most of the survivors to be muslims able to impose the caliphate, to be a vicory.
To the Soviets, the concept of “Mutually Assured Destruction” was a deterrent. To Iran, it’s an inviting temptation.
Yep. Yin and Yang. Our thinking it’s a deterrent, and them saying, yes let’s do.
I have a good idea about how to purify them with fire...........can you say: E=Mc squared............
__________________________________________________________
Is that the same as “glass em’?”
As for the possibility of a U.S. or an Israeli military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, this is said to be no option at all: at best, say the advocates of containment, such strikes would merely delay the regime's nuclear programs while giving it an alibi to consolidate its power at home and cause mayhem abroad.I think it's time for editorials stating that the bludgeoning deaths of containment advocates is inevitable, and how preemptive strikes in the form of legal harassment and arrests will only give an alibi to those who want them dead. That should clarify the actual nature of these dumb bastards' arguments and advocacy. Thanks rmlew.
“if’ we had a President(we don’t) Iran would not be a problem . We could launch tomahawks to take out their air defense , radar sites,etc., then give Israel a clear path to take out their nuclear program. Simple !!!Millions of Americans will someday die if we allow terrorist nations to have nuclear weapons.
Eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we’re screwed.
This is not a plan, but a guaranteed disaster.
Israel cannot and will not be able to take this course....
He might even damn the earth to nuclear war.
The NEXT President may as well get it over with and strike preemptively.
Well thanks!
Mutually Assured Destruction is not a threat to these people.
////////////////
We are not there yet. We are presently at Assured Destruction. But, our President loves islam and terrorists soooo, he will do nothing, nada zero. Then when Iran does get nukes, it will be MAD time.
Right now we have the power as does Israel to annihilate Iran without losing on person. Time is not on our side, especially if we no longer have courage to act.
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.