A Point Of No Return: IF Iran Is Allowed To Join The "Nuclear Club"
Thomas Sowell is a person I consider extremely intelligent. It's not often when people feel humble in the presence of greatness, but I have before from reading Mr. Sowell's columns, and yesterday was no exception. He addressed the issue looming on the horizon that common sense people are looking at, and the MSM and politicos are virtually ignoring. These people will be the first ones to scream "Why weren't we told about this?" the day that Iran announces it has a nuke.
When you are boating on the Niagara River, there are signs marking the point at which you must go ashore or else you will be sucked over the falls. With Iran moving toward the development of nuclear weapons, we are getting dangerously close to that fatal point of no return on the world stage. Yet there are few signs of alarm in our public discourse, whether among politicians, the media, or the intelligentsia. There is much more discussion of whether government anti-terrorism agents should be able to look at the records of books borrowed from public libraries.
The Iranian government itself is giving us the clearest evidence of what a nuclear Iran would mean, with its fanatical hate-filled declarations about wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. But send not to know for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.
There's no question that Iran dislikes Israel. Actually, dislike is too weak a word. They abhor Israel. Pres. Ahmadinejad has stated that he wants to destroy Israel. He has stated that the Holocaust is a farce. There is nothing but visceral hatred exuding from Iran in the direction of Israel. If this nation obtains the ability to make a nuclear weapon, they are going to nail Israel with it.
Just last year, before the American election, Osama bin Laden warned that those places that voted for the re-election of the President would become targets of terrorist retribution.
We could ignore him then. But neither we, nor our children, nor our children's children will ever be able to ignore him again if he gets nuclear weapons from a nuclear Iran.
And that is a scary thought. Iran and bin Laden share a common hatred fro Israel, but they also share that hatred for America. If Iran is able to create a nuclear weapon, and duplicate it several times, there is nothing preventing them from passing such a weapon off to al Qaeda for use against America. Getting it here is irrelevant. Having it here is the case at hand. I'm not an alarmist. I'm a realist. Al Qaeda's hands wrapped around such a detonator is not a prospect I'd like to see in my lifetime.
We will live at his mercy -- of which he has none -- if he can wipe out New York or Chicago if we do not knuckle under to his demands, however outrageous those demands might be.
We will truly have passed the point of no return. What will future generations think of us, that we drifted on past the warning signs, preoccupied with library records and with giving foreign terrorists the same legal rights as American citizens?
Further, what will future generations think when they see we allowed another North Korea to form? What will they think if we allow another one to rise, only this one has the full ability to act on it's threats? They will not be visited by images of Washington or Henry. Patton and MacArthur will not enter into their dreams. Cowards will be their foremost thought because we are ignoring this threat. The EU and Russia are negotiating with Iran. We don't negotiate with terrorists or terrorist regimes. Iran is such a regime, and European appeasement may end being our undoing.
We could deter the nuclear power of the Soviet Union with our own nuclear power. But you cannot deter suicidal terrorists. You can only kill them or stop them from getting what they need to kill you.
We are killing them in Iraq, though our media seem wholly uninterested in that part of the story, just as they seem uninterested in the fact that the fate of Western civilization may be at stake just across the border in Iran.
Agreed. Iran isn't going to back down, and go hide when they manage to create one. They will be emboldened. Saber rattling will know no ends if they acquire nuclear weapons. Further, saber rattling won't be directed at Israel, at the US, or even at Great Britain. No, nukes will be pointed at all of us, and they will be under the control of a mad, dangerous regime; one in which part of their military is comprised of Hezbollah terrorists more than willing to die for their overall cause of jihad.
Of course they would like us to prevent Iran from going nuclear -- if it can be done nicely by diplomacy, with the approval of the U.N., and in ways that do not offend "world opinion."
It is as if we were on the Niagara River and wanted to go ashore before it was too late, but did not want to turn on the motors for fear of disturbing the neighbors with excessive noise.
But at that point, the choice is between being serious or being suicidal.
BINGO! Right now, we're anything but serious. If we were, we'd make it known to Israel that we'll help them hit the nuclear sites in Iran. But all too often, we're the ones scolding them for their actions. If Iran is to be taken down a peg or ten, then we should be working together to prevent their nuclear rise. Those in charge of Iran are just fanatical enough that they won't care what sort of nuclear holocaust they might cause with such a strike. They simply want the infidels dead and gone. I'm sorry, but I'm one infidel that just can't lie down and roll over; it's "union" rules.
That is where we are internationally today. Many years ago, there was a book with the title "The Suicide of the West." It may have been ahead of its time.
The squeamishness, indecision, and wishful thinking of the West are its greatest dangers because the West has the power to destroy any other danger. But it does not have the will.
Partly this is because most of our Western allies have been sheltered from the brutal realities of the international jungle for more than half a century under the American nuclear umbrella.
People insulated from dangers for generations can indulge themselves in the illusion that there are no dangers -- as much of Western Europe has. This is part of the "world opinion" that makes us hesitant to take any decisive action to prevent a nightmare scenario of nuclear weapons in the hands of hate-filled fanatics.
And honestly, we've tried to play by the world's rules for too long. We have long played the role of a janitor in the world, cleaning up everyone else's messes. We're sick of it. The idea that Iran might create a nuclear weapon in the next few months should give everyone in the federal government a moment of pause, and prompt them to take a more pro-active role in eliminating this growing threat before it blossoms. A strike? We could only hope for such a move by the United States or Israel. When it comes, we should be thankful.
Do not look for Europe to support any decisive action against Iran. But look for much of their intelligentsia, and much of our own intelligentsia as well, to be alert for any opportunity to wax morally superior if we do act.
And this is where we need to draw a defining line for these knuckleheads. They want to play the appeasement game, and capitulate to a brutal, despotic, hateful regime then they can emigrate to Europe. We should not take ANY chances with Iran. They will be just like North Korea. The ill-fated policies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton gave us that threat, and the longer we dawdle with them, the longer they'll have to develop more nuclear weapons. The same sort of bargaining--like those going on between the EU and Iran right now--will only lead the world down a similar road. The difference is that Kim Jong-Il is literally trying to play the diplomacy game to gain some benefits, like nuclear fuel. Iran won't negotiate. They'll simply strike, or pass the technology off to someone who will use it, like al Qaeda or Hezbollah. They've got ties to the organizations in the Gaza Strip. Does anyone really want to see them pass off a nuke to Fatah, Hamas, or Islamic Jihad? I thought not.
They will be able to think of all sorts of nicer alternatives to taking out Iran's nuclear development sites. They will be able to come up with all sorts of abstract arguments and moral equivalence, such as: Other countries have nuclear weapons. Why not Iran?
Plain and simply put: We can't trust Iran. We can't trust Iran to uphold it's word, and the last time I checked, since 1979, we have been an enemy of Iran. We don't let our enemies get an advantage. When the Soviets obtained the A-Bomb through their spies, Washington started wetting it's collective pants. I can guarantee our readers that should Iran obtain a nuke, the defecation in Washington will surpass mere urination.
Debating abstract questions is much easier than confronting concrete and often brutal alternatives. The big question is whether we are serious or suicidal.
If we are serious about preventing this regime from gaining a nuclear weapon, then we should be working with Israel to de-fang the snake. We should build up the dissident movement in Iran. The students in Iran have called for democratic reforms, and demonstrate as much as they can. They lack direction and training to being the downfall of the ayatollah. This is another avenue we should be pursuing.
"We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them against one another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorists. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorsim will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." --Pres. George W. Bush, 20 Sept., 2001.
I take that quote to heart because it spells it out for nations like Iran. You support terror (which they do), then you're a hostile regime and you'll be treated as such. I haven't seen much regarding Iran, but I'd like to. As a matter of fact, I emphasize that this should be the next main priority for the United States. Allowing a nation like Iran to have nuclear weapons in that region is only asking for trouble. If they obtain them, and we do nothing, it's the equivalent of handing Iran the knife, and the US exposing her arms to them.
Publius II
Thomas Sowell is a person I consider extremely intelligent. It's not often when people feel humble in the presence of greatness, but I have before from reading Mr. Sowell's columns, and yesterday was no exception. He addressed the issue looming on the horizon that common sense people are looking at, and the MSM and politicos are virtually ignoring. These people will be the first ones to scream "Why weren't we told about this?" the day that Iran announces it has a nuke.
When you are boating on the Niagara River, there are signs marking the point at which you must go ashore or else you will be sucked over the falls. With Iran moving toward the development of nuclear weapons, we are getting dangerously close to that fatal point of no return on the world stage. Yet there are few signs of alarm in our public discourse, whether among politicians, the media, or the intelligentsia. There is much more discussion of whether government anti-terrorism agents should be able to look at the records of books borrowed from public libraries.
The Iranian government itself is giving us the clearest evidence of what a nuclear Iran would mean, with its fanatical hate-filled declarations about wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. But send not to know for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.
There's no question that Iran dislikes Israel. Actually, dislike is too weak a word. They abhor Israel. Pres. Ahmadinejad has stated that he wants to destroy Israel. He has stated that the Holocaust is a farce. There is nothing but visceral hatred exuding from Iran in the direction of Israel. If this nation obtains the ability to make a nuclear weapon, they are going to nail Israel with it.
Just last year, before the American election, Osama bin Laden warned that those places that voted for the re-election of the President would become targets of terrorist retribution.
We could ignore him then. But neither we, nor our children, nor our children's children will ever be able to ignore him again if he gets nuclear weapons from a nuclear Iran.
And that is a scary thought. Iran and bin Laden share a common hatred fro Israel, but they also share that hatred for America. If Iran is able to create a nuclear weapon, and duplicate it several times, there is nothing preventing them from passing such a weapon off to al Qaeda for use against America. Getting it here is irrelevant. Having it here is the case at hand. I'm not an alarmist. I'm a realist. Al Qaeda's hands wrapped around such a detonator is not a prospect I'd like to see in my lifetime.
We will live at his mercy -- of which he has none -- if he can wipe out New York or Chicago if we do not knuckle under to his demands, however outrageous those demands might be.
We will truly have passed the point of no return. What will future generations think of us, that we drifted on past the warning signs, preoccupied with library records and with giving foreign terrorists the same legal rights as American citizens?
Further, what will future generations think when they see we allowed another North Korea to form? What will they think if we allow another one to rise, only this one has the full ability to act on it's threats? They will not be visited by images of Washington or Henry. Patton and MacArthur will not enter into their dreams. Cowards will be their foremost thought because we are ignoring this threat. The EU and Russia are negotiating with Iran. We don't negotiate with terrorists or terrorist regimes. Iran is such a regime, and European appeasement may end being our undoing.
We could deter the nuclear power of the Soviet Union with our own nuclear power. But you cannot deter suicidal terrorists. You can only kill them or stop them from getting what they need to kill you.
We are killing them in Iraq, though our media seem wholly uninterested in that part of the story, just as they seem uninterested in the fact that the fate of Western civilization may be at stake just across the border in Iran.
Agreed. Iran isn't going to back down, and go hide when they manage to create one. They will be emboldened. Saber rattling will know no ends if they acquire nuclear weapons. Further, saber rattling won't be directed at Israel, at the US, or even at Great Britain. No, nukes will be pointed at all of us, and they will be under the control of a mad, dangerous regime; one in which part of their military is comprised of Hezbollah terrorists more than willing to die for their overall cause of jihad.
Of course they would like us to prevent Iran from going nuclear -- if it can be done nicely by diplomacy, with the approval of the U.N., and in ways that do not offend "world opinion."
It is as if we were on the Niagara River and wanted to go ashore before it was too late, but did not want to turn on the motors for fear of disturbing the neighbors with excessive noise.
But at that point, the choice is between being serious or being suicidal.
BINGO! Right now, we're anything but serious. If we were, we'd make it known to Israel that we'll help them hit the nuclear sites in Iran. But all too often, we're the ones scolding them for their actions. If Iran is to be taken down a peg or ten, then we should be working together to prevent their nuclear rise. Those in charge of Iran are just fanatical enough that they won't care what sort of nuclear holocaust they might cause with such a strike. They simply want the infidels dead and gone. I'm sorry, but I'm one infidel that just can't lie down and roll over; it's "union" rules.
That is where we are internationally today. Many years ago, there was a book with the title "The Suicide of the West." It may have been ahead of its time.
The squeamishness, indecision, and wishful thinking of the West are its greatest dangers because the West has the power to destroy any other danger. But it does not have the will.
Partly this is because most of our Western allies have been sheltered from the brutal realities of the international jungle for more than half a century under the American nuclear umbrella.
People insulated from dangers for generations can indulge themselves in the illusion that there are no dangers -- as much of Western Europe has. This is part of the "world opinion" that makes us hesitant to take any decisive action to prevent a nightmare scenario of nuclear weapons in the hands of hate-filled fanatics.
And honestly, we've tried to play by the world's rules for too long. We have long played the role of a janitor in the world, cleaning up everyone else's messes. We're sick of it. The idea that Iran might create a nuclear weapon in the next few months should give everyone in the federal government a moment of pause, and prompt them to take a more pro-active role in eliminating this growing threat before it blossoms. A strike? We could only hope for such a move by the United States or Israel. When it comes, we should be thankful.
Do not look for Europe to support any decisive action against Iran. But look for much of their intelligentsia, and much of our own intelligentsia as well, to be alert for any opportunity to wax morally superior if we do act.
And this is where we need to draw a defining line for these knuckleheads. They want to play the appeasement game, and capitulate to a brutal, despotic, hateful regime then they can emigrate to Europe. We should not take ANY chances with Iran. They will be just like North Korea. The ill-fated policies of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton gave us that threat, and the longer we dawdle with them, the longer they'll have to develop more nuclear weapons. The same sort of bargaining--like those going on between the EU and Iran right now--will only lead the world down a similar road. The difference is that Kim Jong-Il is literally trying to play the diplomacy game to gain some benefits, like nuclear fuel. Iran won't negotiate. They'll simply strike, or pass the technology off to someone who will use it, like al Qaeda or Hezbollah. They've got ties to the organizations in the Gaza Strip. Does anyone really want to see them pass off a nuke to Fatah, Hamas, or Islamic Jihad? I thought not.
They will be able to think of all sorts of nicer alternatives to taking out Iran's nuclear development sites. They will be able to come up with all sorts of abstract arguments and moral equivalence, such as: Other countries have nuclear weapons. Why not Iran?
Plain and simply put: We can't trust Iran. We can't trust Iran to uphold it's word, and the last time I checked, since 1979, we have been an enemy of Iran. We don't let our enemies get an advantage. When the Soviets obtained the A-Bomb through their spies, Washington started wetting it's collective pants. I can guarantee our readers that should Iran obtain a nuke, the defecation in Washington will surpass mere urination.
Debating abstract questions is much easier than confronting concrete and often brutal alternatives. The big question is whether we are serious or suicidal.
If we are serious about preventing this regime from gaining a nuclear weapon, then we should be working with Israel to de-fang the snake. We should build up the dissident movement in Iran. The students in Iran have called for democratic reforms, and demonstrate as much as they can. They lack direction and training to being the downfall of the ayatollah. This is another avenue we should be pursuing.
"We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them against one another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorists. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorsim will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." --Pres. George W. Bush, 20 Sept., 2001.
I take that quote to heart because it spells it out for nations like Iran. You support terror (which they do), then you're a hostile regime and you'll be treated as such. I haven't seen much regarding Iran, but I'd like to. As a matter of fact, I emphasize that this should be the next main priority for the United States. Allowing a nation like Iran to have nuclear weapons in that region is only asking for trouble. If they obtain them, and we do nothing, it's the equivalent of handing Iran the knife, and the US exposing her arms to them.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 8:30 PM
1 Comments:
ran presents a clear and present danger to Israel. I'm confident Israel will remove that danger in their own proven way. When they do, we should support Israel against those that condemn Israel including the UN. Rawriter
Post a Comment
<< Home