What does a country have to do before we will actually decide to bomb them? I’ve spent 29 years looking at Iran and asking myself this question. The subject first came up in 1979 when Iran broke international law by invading the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. They actually took embassy staff and U.S. military personnel HOSTAGE! Let’s also throw in the fact that the Iranian government sponsored daily rallies where the willing population joyfully shouted “Death to America”. History will show that the only thing that saved the Iranian regime from destruction was the fact that we had the most inept president in U.S. history occupying the Oval Office. To this day, we are still paying for the foolishness of Jimmy Carter.
Since that time, we have seen terrorist organizations openly establish corporate headquarters in Tehran. Iran has subjugated Syria to their will, using them as a terrorist safe haven, which further resulted in the enslavement of Lebanon.. Iran has directly and indirectly attacked their neighbors. They have harbored, funded, trained and exported terrorism around the world. They have announced their intentions to destroy Israel and the United States. And they are actively seeking to build nuclear weapons to carry out these aims.
United Nations economic sanctions or even direct military action can only come with the blessing of the Security Council, so Iran has effectively bought the protection of Russia and China. China needs cheap oil for their economic expansion to counter U.S. influence, and Russia is pocketing any money they can get by providing Iran with nuclear material. Knowing that Tel Aviv or New York City would be the primary targets of any nuclear attacks, other UN members can comfortably sit back and advise diplomacy, figuring that a defeated Iran would make the U.S. unacceptably more powerful – and if they are wrong, oh well, at least it’s not their cities that got nuked.
At best, it is 50/50 on whether or not Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama will be the next president. Can they be counted on to take action against Iran in time? Would it be unfair in blaming Mr. Bush for not doing it while he had the chance?
George W. Bush has finally decided that the end has come for the Iranian regime. We can no longer risk having New York, Los Angeles or Washington, DC turned into a smoking hole because we tried appeasing the UN, our “allies, “moderate Arabs”, and “the World Community” with endless and pointless negotiations. Iran has proven itself to be a country that can’t be negotiated with, and will do anything to achieve our destruction. This remains a goal that they continue to clearly and openly announce to the world.
In 2002, President Bush had decided that the U.S. was going to go to war with Iraq. Back then, he naively believed that it was in the interest of our country to be very clear as to our intentions. As part of his efforts to get the support of neighboring Arab countries, Mr. Bush dispatched Vice President Cheney to the Middle East to meet with local leaders informing them of our intentions, and asking for whatever help they could offer.
As it turned out, this did not work for a number of reasons. First, leaders of Arab countries simply do not have the intestinal fortitude to publicly stand up to murderous dictators of neighboring countries. They can’t admit that they themselves don’t have the nerve to take such an action, and certainly can’t admit that they need the United States to do it. They also can’t be seen as supporting the destruction of fellow Arab Muslims by a western power, when the destruction of fellow Arab Muslims is something they view as their job. They may have wanted Saddam to go, but not if it meant they had to publicly support someone who was clearly horning in on their action.
Additionally, such a public display of our intentions allowed detractors of the impending invasion to oppose us in an equally public way. For example, France wanted to derail an invasion. They had billions of dollars of oil contracts with Iraq. So, they dispatched their foreign minister to shadow Mr. Cheney on his trip, with the intent of derailing any agreements he was able to arrange.
Mr. Bush has seemingly learned from past mistakes. Sometimes a job has to be done by the top guy. Instead of sending Dick Cheney this time, Bush decided to make this Middle Eastern trip himself. During this ten country trip, there was no fanfare about ginning up support for action against Iran. Instead, we were all given the politically correct smokescreen that he was trying to solve the age-old Israeli / Palestinian issue.
The genius of this is that Mr. Bush’s political opponents are too heavily invested in solving the Palestinian quagmire to object to a presidential trip purportedly taken on its behalf. The open secret is that there has been no reason to believe that either side is any closer to coming to terms, and Mr. Bush has been loudly skeptical of the whole idea since he took office. More likely, his conversations in Saudi Arabia went something like “boy, we’d sure like those Palestinians to get their own country, and oh, by the way, we’ll be bombing the snot out of Iran soon, so do you think you could pump a little more oil in the meantime?”
Since that time, we have seen terrorist organizations openly establish corporate headquarters in Tehran. Iran has subjugated Syria to their will, using them as a terrorist safe haven, which further resulted in the enslavement of Lebanon.. Iran has directly and indirectly attacked their neighbors. They have harbored, funded, trained and exported terrorism around the world. They have announced their intentions to destroy Israel and the United States. And they are actively seeking to build nuclear weapons to carry out these aims.
United Nations economic sanctions or even direct military action can only come with the blessing of the Security Council, so Iran has effectively bought the protection of Russia and China. China needs cheap oil for their economic expansion to counter U.S. influence, and Russia is pocketing any money they can get by providing Iran with nuclear material. Knowing that Tel Aviv or New York City would be the primary targets of any nuclear attacks, other UN members can comfortably sit back and advise diplomacy, figuring that a defeated Iran would make the U.S. unacceptably more powerful – and if they are wrong, oh well, at least it’s not their cities that got nuked.
At best, it is 50/50 on whether or not Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama will be the next president. Can they be counted on to take action against Iran in time? Would it be unfair in blaming Mr. Bush for not doing it while he had the chance?
George W. Bush has finally decided that the end has come for the Iranian regime. We can no longer risk having New York, Los Angeles or Washington, DC turned into a smoking hole because we tried appeasing the UN, our “allies, “moderate Arabs”, and “the World Community” with endless and pointless negotiations. Iran has proven itself to be a country that can’t be negotiated with, and will do anything to achieve our destruction. This remains a goal that they continue to clearly and openly announce to the world.
In 2002, President Bush had decided that the U.S. was going to go to war with Iraq. Back then, he naively believed that it was in the interest of our country to be very clear as to our intentions. As part of his efforts to get the support of neighboring Arab countries, Mr. Bush dispatched Vice President Cheney to the Middle East to meet with local leaders informing them of our intentions, and asking for whatever help they could offer.
As it turned out, this did not work for a number of reasons. First, leaders of Arab countries simply do not have the intestinal fortitude to publicly stand up to murderous dictators of neighboring countries. They can’t admit that they themselves don’t have the nerve to take such an action, and certainly can’t admit that they need the United States to do it. They also can’t be seen as supporting the destruction of fellow Arab Muslims by a western power, when the destruction of fellow Arab Muslims is something they view as their job. They may have wanted Saddam to go, but not if it meant they had to publicly support someone who was clearly horning in on their action.
Additionally, such a public display of our intentions allowed detractors of the impending invasion to oppose us in an equally public way. For example, France wanted to derail an invasion. They had billions of dollars of oil contracts with Iraq. So, they dispatched their foreign minister to shadow Mr. Cheney on his trip, with the intent of derailing any agreements he was able to arrange.
Mr. Bush has seemingly learned from past mistakes. Sometimes a job has to be done by the top guy. Instead of sending Dick Cheney this time, Bush decided to make this Middle Eastern trip himself. During this ten country trip, there was no fanfare about ginning up support for action against Iran. Instead, we were all given the politically correct smokescreen that he was trying to solve the age-old Israeli / Palestinian issue.
The genius of this is that Mr. Bush’s political opponents are too heavily invested in solving the Palestinian quagmire to object to a presidential trip purportedly taken on its behalf. The open secret is that there has been no reason to believe that either side is any closer to coming to terms, and Mr. Bush has been loudly skeptical of the whole idea since he took office. More likely, his conversations in Saudi Arabia went something like “boy, we’d sure like those Palestinians to get their own country, and oh, by the way, we’ll be bombing the snot out of Iran soon, so do you think you could pump a little more oil in the meantime?”
No comments:
Post a Comment