Posted on 03/10/2015 11:16:31 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
America, we have a problem.
In the blood-soaked chaotic Middle East, with few exceptions like the Kurds, our friends either can't or won't fight.
The Free Syrian Army folded. The U.S.-armed Hazm force in Syria has just collapsed after being routed by the al-Nusra Front. The Iraqi army we trained and equipped fled Mosul and ran all the way to Baghdad.
The Turks could annihilate ISIS in Syria, but they won't fight. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arabs have sent zero troops to fight ISIS. A handful of air strikes is it.
Now consider what our old enemies have done and are doing.
Hezbollah and Iran have sustained Bashar Assad's Syrian army for four years and have ISIS and the al-Nusra Front on the defensive around Aleppo.
Iran and its allied Shiite militia in Iraq are battling ISIS for Tikrit.
Backed by Hezbollah, Houthi rebels have seized Yemen's capital and are battling al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. AQAP is the No. 1 terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland.
While Iran and its allies are fighting al-Qaida and ISIS, Turkey and our Arab allies are malingerers at best and collaborators at worst.
How explain this? Not difficult.
The Shiites, a religious minority in the Muslim world -- Hezbollah, Assad's regime, Baghdad, Tehran -- see ISIS as a mortal threat and are willing to fight to kill the monster.
Our Sunni allies won't go out and fight ISIS, because that would make them allies of Iran and the Shiites, whom they fear even more.
Our Sunni friends want America to crush ISIS and al-Qaida, then to crush Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. But why is it in our interest to send U.S. troops back into any of these wars?
Is America more threatened than our Arab allies?
Rather than listening to allies who are non-combatants, we should take a hard look at the Mideast. To whom does the future belong? And with what can we live?
The Republicans want to give a blank check to Obama and any future president to fight ISIS and al-Qaida everywhere and forever. And they want the United States to treat Iran as we should have treated Nazi Germany had Hitler been about to get the bomb.
But if the GOP platform takes the neocon-Netanyahu line that we must not only fight ISIS and al-Qaida, but also Iran and Syria, the party will imperil its improving chances for 2016.
Americans don't want another war.
And if John Kerry comes home with a deal on Iran's nuclear program, Americans are likely to reject a party that is seen as trying to torpedo that deal, when the alternative is war with Iran.
We do not know exactly what is in the Kerry deal, but what has been revealed thus far is no cause for panic or hysteria.
Though Israel has 200 atomic bombs, Iran has not produced a single ounce of uranium enriched to bomb-grade 90 percent.
Since talks began, Iran has diluted all of its 20-percent enriched uranium and halted production. Tehran is willing to cut her operating centrifuges by a third.
Inspectors and cameras are now in all of Iran's nuclear facilities. The heavy-water plant at Arak, which would produce plutonium, has been halted. The reprocessing plant that would be needed to extract bomb-grade material has not even been started.
U.S. intelligence agencies in 2007 and 2011 declared, with high confidence, that Iran has no active bomb program.
While Bibi Netanyahu says the Ayatollah tweeted that Israel must be "annihilated," the same Ayatollah issued a fatwa against Iran ever producing nuclear weapons.
We cannot trust Iran, we are told. Correct. Nor should we, as history has proven. Moscow cheated on Nixon's SALT I agreement by replacing its light single-warhead SS-11 missiles with heavy SS-19s with multiple warheads.
But as Meir Dagan, ex-head of Mossad points out, if Iran cheats at any of its facilities, we will know it, and it would take a year before Tehran could produce enough highly enriched uranium even to test a bomb.
Plenty of time to gas up the B-2s.
Another question, too rarely raised, is this:
Why would Iran test and build a nuclear bomb, when this would set off a nuclear arms race across the Middle East and put Iran in mortal peril of being smashed by the United States, or by Israel with a preemptive strike?
Right now, Hezbollah dominates Lebanon. Assad is gaining ground in Syria. Iraq, thanks to "W," is Iran's ally, not the mortal enemy of Saddam's day. The Houthi have Sanaa.
The Shiite majority in Bahrain, where the U.S. Fifth Fleet is berthed, will one day dominate that Gulf state. And the Shiites in oil-rich northeast Saudi Arabia will one day rise up against Riyadh.
Why build a bomb, why get into a war with a nuclear-armed superpower, when everything's going your way?
Good point. An EMP wouldn’t kill enough people directly to draw much response from a transformed America. President O’Malley would launch an apology tour.
EMP won’t cause the absolute destruction of America but a decent chunk there of. The Persians have been practicing quite a bit with getting just the right altitude with missiles and the trajectories look like it would sail something straight up our southern border. Last I read, we aren’t monitoring much on the southern border these days (but its been a while since I have looked into that).
Yes
Yea, he was creative back in the 80’s when he said the western world was in Jeopardy from unfettered and unchecked illegal immigration by showing the birth rate disparities that will happen.
PB’s last 3 OP EDs have been pretty low quality, considering the quality PB has delivered in the past.
I do believe he’s gone old and lost some brain power.
PB say’s “Why would Iran test and build a nuclear bomb, when this would set off a nuclear arms race across the Middle East and put Iran in mortal peril of being smashed by the United States, or by Israel with a preemptive strike?”
Is strikingly ignorant and I’m surprised he went with that.
If Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia wants the U.S back in the region, then they need to grant concessions, gobs of money and other economic considerations.
If we’re going to be the world police, we ought to at least get paid for it.
I'm not convinced of that.
I haven't seen a good argument for fighting them at all.
The only question the US should ask is: If they take over the entire Middle East, will they sell the oil at fair market rates?
Iran is an entirely different story. They pose an existential threat to the current world order. They cannot be allowed to obtain a nuke, even if we have to nuke them.
Bitter old childless antisemite Pat will cheerlead for any enemy of Israel.
You make the same mistake Buchanan does, believing that these people think like we do, and make decisions based on what is in their best interests. They don’t. They are an apocalyptic theocracy, just like ISIS aspires to be, just with a slightly different interpretation of the end times events that they aspire to be a key part of. That’s their goal, not self-preservation.
Buchanan is writing that America does not want another war. No one has made the case that America should get into another war. War might be in the interest of some other countries so let them make war with their own resources if it is that important. Leave us alone. We are not the world’s policeman.
Well of course since their primary enemy is the same as Buchanan’s. The Jews.
A genuine debbie downer imbecilic nutter.
Of course they want the bomb. At this point the bomb is the international equivalent to a car in high school, it means you’re one of the big boys, playing on the real stage, a country that matters. You can talk all you want about the bad things that happen to them if they get it and why they really shouldn’t want it, but in the end everybody wants to be one of the cool kids. And cool kids have the bomb.
You’re correct of course.
Does Israel have submarines that can launch cruise missiles with atomic warheads?
My view is that if Iran nukes Israel, it would wipe out Israel but there definitely wouldn’t be any Iran left either.
The EMP threat is grossly and ridiculously overrated. It is, quite simply, fiction sold by fear mongers and bought by people who don’t understand the math of altitude. They do NOT have the launch vehicles for a US busting EMP... hell at this juncture WE don’t have the launch vehicles for a US busting EMP.
I don’t know if they have the sub. Of course when Iran gets a nuke they’ll learn the joy of MAD. Honestly the most dangerous part of them having nukes isn’t any kind of “open” missile or bomb strike. It’s the souped up “now with radiation” terrorist strike, a lot harder to trace back to any particular nation.
No doubt they preach that BS to the useful idiot troops, but the top guys are no rush to meet their virgins.
“No doubt they preach that BS to the useful idiot troops, but the top guys are no rush to meet their virgins.”
On the contrary, in Iran, the most fanatical believers are the ones at the top. Sure, they personally would rather not be the cannon fodder on the front lines, but they certainly believe in the apocalyptic propaganda that they preach. To think otherwise would be a grave mistake.
I'm not convinced of that.
I haven't seen a good argument for fighting them at all.
The only question the US should ask is: If they take over the entire Middle East, will they sell the oil at fair market rates?
Iran is an entirely different story. They pose an existential threat to the current world order. They cannot be allowed to obtain a nuke, even if we have to nuke them.
Where's your convincing argument? Having ISIS in control of a large swath of the Middle East and sending terrorists to the West or inspiring people living in the West to commit terror acts is serious business. Where's the evidence that right now Iran is anywhere near as much of a threat?
It's a country, sure, rather than a gang of gunmen or terrorists, but that may actually mean that they're more likely to be swayed by rational considerations and less of a threat than ISIS.
pat bucanan is a moron..
he needs to go away,,
Iran has been the worlds #1 state sponsor of terrorism for the last 40 years. Hizbollah. IED's in Iraq that killed 100's of US troops and maimed thousands.
And now they pursue nukes.
Yes, they are a FAR greater threat than ISIS.
ISIS is little more than a violent street gang, easily dispensed by any modern army.
As for them sending terrorists abroad, they will do that whether they control a street corner in Tikrit or all of Mesopotamia and the Arabian peninsula.
Still, they are little more than a violent street gang because they don't have any sophisticated capabilities.
Iran has the same motives and goals...but with FAR more capability.
ISIS is not now and will likely never be a existential security threat to the USA or any other modern state.
PB has more than MADE IT CLEAR that he prefers that Israel would simply “go away”, so nothing new here in his support for Iran (the country that has the best chance of accomplishing that dream).
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.