Replies

I've noticed, in the last day or two, that the rhetoric coming from a certain kind of liberal (meaning one, I suppose, that at least recognizes that we have here a "grave problem") has devolved, like all liberal rhetoric, into something specious and ineffectual, but which offers one who mouths these new truths the tremendous psychological satisfaction of appearing both "concerned," and "realistic" while ultimately advocating the reassuring wisdom of doing nothing. These are the people who now advance the notion that we can and should "contain" Iran. They argue that because military options against this madman will be uncertain and difficult, and their repercussions unknowable, but most likely, unpleasant, that they are beyond the pale of the permissible. These talking points, which will soon be the position of the Democratic Party, are (to paraphrase the liberals favorite sage, John Lennon) in essence: "all we are saying is give containment a chance;" that is, when translated into harsh realities, that we must learn to live with a nuclear Iran. To this mindset, "containment" is the deliciously irresistible solution to the old dilemma of having your cake or eating it: in this happily serious, high-minded, and most principled world, we shall have lots of international conferences and high-ranking summits, hence no one can say we are not "doing something," yet by the same token we aren't forced to consider the perilous consequences of actually "doing something" as concrete as a missile attack.

Of course, this would be an utter catastrophe. Iran cannot be contained, and a hodge-podge of international carrots and sticks will have little effect on the regime's behavior. It must be said, and it must be said now: the paramount reason Iran is developing nuclear weapons is not self-defense, or national prestige, but to destroy the state of Israel, and inaugurate the Shia end time with the destruction of the Jewish people. Unless the international community is prepared to guarantee a martyr's paradise for the regime's leaders, which is seemingly the only thing they desire, we must be prepared to acknowledge that the grab bag of earthly rewards and punishments with which to beguile the regime's fanatics will prove less enticing than a handful of ash.

Thx for the well-written and incisive post.

...the paramount reason Iran is developing nuclear weapons is not self-defense, or national prestige, but to destroy the state of Israel, and inaugurate the Shia end time with the destruction of the Jewish people.

This matter with Iran overshadows all other issues. However we may combat islam in the long run, Iran cannot be permitted to have nuclear weapons.

....inaugurate the Shia end time with the destruction of the Jewish people...

This willingness of the Shi'a to make the obliteration of Israel (and the Jews ... and as many other infidels as possible) as the instrument of their own self-immolation is something that few in the West can believe ... or can take seriously.

However, it is at the very core of the Shi'a belief system. There is no negotiation with that.