Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Nuclear Iranian Nightmare

The inestimable Mark Steyn has managed to precisely portray Iranian aspirations and the options available to the West in his article, Facing Down Iran. Steyn correctly points out that "there are never good and bad options, only bad and much much worse." Today the options we face are much worse than those faced 20 years ago and much better than those we will face only five years from now should we seek the comfort and false security of inaction.
Four years into the “war on terror,” the Bush administration has begun promoting a new formulation: “the long war.” Not a reassuring name. In a short war, put your money on tanks and bombs—our strengths. In a long war, the better bet is will and manpower—their strengths, and our great weakness. Even a loser can win when he’s up against a defeatist. A big chunk of Western civilization, consciously or otherwise, has given the impression that it’s dying to surrender to somebody, anybody. Reasonably enough, Islam figures: Hey, why not us? If you add to the advantages of will and manpower a nuclear capability, the odds shift dramatically.

At hinge moments of history, there are never good and bad options, only bad and much much worse. Our options today are significantly worse because we didn’t take the bad one back then.

Anyone who spends half an hour looking at Iranian foreign policy over the last 27 years sees five things:

1. contempt for the most basic international conventions;
2. long-reach extraterritoriality;
3. effective promotion of radical Pan-Islamism;
4. a willingness to go the extra mile for Jew-killing (unlike, say, Osama);
5. an all-but-total synchronization between rhetoric and action.

Once again, we face a choice between bad and worse options. There can be no “surgical” strike in any meaningful sense: Iran’s clients on the ground will retaliate in Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, and Europe. Nor should we put much stock in the country’s allegedly “pro-American” youth. This shouldn’t be a touchy-feely nation-building exercise: rehabilitation may be a bonus, but the primary objective should be punishment—and incarceration. It’s up to the Iranian people how nutty a government they want to live with, but extraterritorial nuttiness has to be shown not to pay. That means swift, massive, devastating force that decapitates the regime—but no occupation.

The cost of de-nuking Iran will be high now but significantly higher with every year it’s postponed. The lesson of the Danish cartoons is the clearest reminder that what is at stake here is the credibility of our civilization. Whether or not we end the nuclearization of the Islamic Republic will be an act that defines our time.


A nuclear Iran is utterly unacceptable. Iran's willingness to employ nuclear weapons at the least provocation and to accept the consequences of a nuclear retaliation make it an absolute certainty that these weapons will be used in the pursuite of Islamic hegemony. A nuclear Iran will present the world with nearly unimaginable options: Capitulation or deployment of nuclear weapons against Western interests.


Blogger sfresht said...

My Title
I like your post i really admire it

Saturday, April 17, 2010  
Blogger abdul sidibe said...

Do you remember the Bloody Verdict of Verdan? It wasn't done by muslims. But the decendants of Charles Martel. Your hatred of others and the darkness of your thought and heart would destroy you. It is fair to say that the muslim you are castigating are actually more peacefully and civilized than you, the son of the dark ages.

Without Muslims, the great grand children of charles martel wouldn't know the concept of the zero, algebra, chemistry and even geometry. You should be thanking the muslim for preserving ancient wisdom for the descendants of Martel to use. Left to Charles Martel and his barbarian books and knowledge would have been burnt.

What is wrong with Iran having nuclear weapon? What is the difference between a nuclear iran and a nuclear israel? Totally no difference, except you are a hippocrat positing as an intellect

Thursday, December 02, 2010  
Blogger YJ Draiman for Mayor of LA said...

Moral and ethical bankruptcy

Americans are finding a grotesque echo in the moral – ethical bankruptcy and worse of a substantial sector of American society.

The “moral depravity” of “the Arabs” who kill innocent civilians. It is more than moral depravity. It is a culture that teaches, educates and breeds hate toward other societies that are not like them as they say “infidels”.

There is no way this situation should be handled with kid gloves – when a poison strikes your body, you remove it and destroy it completely, leaving no trace of such poison.

History has shown that these types of atrocities and acts of barbarism have increased in the past half a century and getting worse by the day.

With today’s advancement in technology and telecommunications, the world has shrunk, events on the other side of the world affect everybody (like the Japanese Nuclear reactor fallout etc.) it affects our health our economy, brings fear and uncertainty to our lives.

The financial crisis we are facing today is the price we pay for years of neglect and government abuse of power.

Is today’s society heading toward annihilation, you be the judge?

YJ Draiman

The Qur'an 17:104 - states the land belongs to the Jewish people

Every time there is a terrorist act, Israel should vacate an Arab village and raze it.

In most lives, I suppose there comes a time when one has to make a supreme effort that calls for every morsel of more and more endeavor and more than not that effort has to be sustained.
The Truth Is Incendiary
The Truth Is Hotter Than A Pile Of Hot Coals

Monday, May 09, 2011  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home