 |
“I formally declare that Iran has joined the club of nuclear countries,” [Ahmadinejad] told an audience that included top military commanders and clerics in the northwestern holy city of Mashhad. The crowd broke into cheers of “Allahu akbar!” or “God is great!” Some stood and thrust their fists in the air. |
Driving home the point the historically literate already understand – this isn’t “Bush’s war”. It’s Jimmy Carter’s.
The Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said �I declare here that the laboratory-scale nuclear fuel cycle has been completed and young scientists produced enriched uranium�. What was his definition of laboratory-scale? Laboratory scale characterization, small scale and pilot scale test method development.
George Bush declare’s “and I have bunkerbusting Nukes, with ‘Ahmadinejad, this buds for you’ writen on the sides”.
This is an outrage, a blatant lie.
I mean, Eric Margolis told us that Iran didn’t want nuclear weapons.
If he’s wrong, I don’t what I’ll do.
Blaming Carter for this is like applauding him for the popularity of peanuts and Billy Beer. He may have had something to do with this but many Republican Presidents since have done diddly squat about it as well.
The experts have said all along it’s not if you have nuclear weapons it’s do you have the capability to deliver them.
If they somehow manage to get 1 to America that place will be called ‘the wasteland formerly known as Iran’.
Kate:
Interestingly, Mark Steyn has a timely article on this point, at http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_2_iran.html. One quote:
“Jimmy Carter should have demanded the same service as Tehran got (referring to successive embassey hijackings) from the British � the swift resolution of the situation by the host government�and, if none was forthcoming, Washington should have reversed the affront to international order quickly, decisively, and in a sufficiently punitive manner. 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…”
I’m going to go out on a limb and comment that I don’t think that Iran’s nuclear ambitions are the problem that the West might have with the Islamic states.
After all, if ANY state (but the US) actually used a nuclear bomb, it would mean the end of that state.
I think the most worrisome and dangerous power of the Islamic states, is their Islamofascism and the West’s inability to deal with that fascism. Islamic fascism could easily take over the political, social and economic infrastructures of the West – without a shot being fired.
The means of this takeover is via political correctness. The West refuses to ‘fight back’ and defend its social, political and legal infrastructures, which are based around respect for individualism, a reliance on reason and science, and freedom of association and action. Islamofascism is genuine fascism; it rejects individual rights and freedoms; it rejects reason and science. It demands obedience to faith-based rules – rules which are completely undemocratic, rules which violate human rights, rules which deny reason and thought.
Its stated agenda is to conquer the West. It doesn’t need a nuclear bomb to do this. It can achieve its goals via the destabilization of terrorist ad hoc bombs – and – the West’s multicultural and politically correct ideology.
Islamofascism has merged this political agenda within its religion. It then says that ‘You can’t criticize what we think, say and do, because it’s all in our religion. If you criticize our religion, you are bigoted, racist, discriminatory…And, we’ll sue you”.
The West collapses under this two-tiered plan of action. It understands physical force, but, only the physical force of 19th c. wars. It cannot understand the physical force of ad hoc terrorism, which attacks not a military but a civilian population, and attacks not to gain control of that site but to terrorize the population and weaken their will to confront.
And, the West has moved itself idea of itself, so far into political correctness, that it cannot criticize another individual or group. It has moved so far into the morass of relativism that it cannot evaluate another individual or group.
Therefore, Islamofascism can easily, readily, sweep through the West. It sets up population ghettoes where it ignores the rules of the country. It instructs its young that the West’s rules are meant to be ignored. It bombs civilians, using ‘martyrs’, so that the West cannot even accuse anyone of a crime and take them to court!
These two tactics – the merging of a fascist political agenda with a religion, coupled with the West’s entrapment of itself within multicultural political correctness, which forbids evaluation and criticism of any ideology, means that the Islamic states don’t need any nuclear bombs to conquer the West.
They can do it with those two tactics alone.
Hello World War III. Anybody read Mark Steyn ‘Facing down Iran’ article?
“Hello World War III. Anybody read Mark Steyn ‘Facing down Iran’ article?
Posted by Irwin Daisy at April 11, 2006 03:38 PM ”
Yes . . . .
http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_2_iran.html
be afraid, be very afraid
Come on – are you sure that you can’t blame Iran on Clinton or Calvert – your extremist views are the laughing stock of political bloggers across the political spectrum, (and getting worse ALL the time).
Rhetorical question #22,793: What would the reaction of the Left be if a new class of nuclear weapons was unveiled on a tarmac in the US in front of a crowd of Christian fundamentalists chanting “God is great”?
It’s funny how the right gives Reagan a pass for the ultimate cut-and-run out of Lebanon.
Remember, Russia or what’s left of it, or former parts of it, are responsible for outfitting Iran, strictly for profit. Remember as well who is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council (an oxymoron if ever there was.)
Some how I don’t have great feelings of peace washing over me, with this news. It was not entirely unexpected; for those who have been paying attention.
I’ll be watching for the Iranian rhetoric to be turned up a notch or two from here on out.
The next question to pose is what sort of response does one formulate, when bad shit happens to basically good people?
The Jimmy Carter Follies
Hollister Free Lance ^ | Sunday, February 26, 2006 | Al Kelsch
Posted on 02/28/2006 9:14:09 AM PST by presidio9
Has Jimmy Carter ever met a dictator he did not love? Unfortunately, this darling of worldwide leftists cannot seem to disappear from the world stage. Listed herewith are some of the more egregious of our 39th President’s follies. The consistent theme is his unwavering support for socialist dictators.
n President Jimmy Carter invited Robert Mugabe to the White House in 1980 and fully supported this dictator’s rise to power in Rhodesia. Moderate black Bishop Abel Muzorewa had been elected to the post of prime minister. However, President Carter with the support of the world press succeeded in declaring the election null and void. Mugabe, an avowed Marxist, was elected in a second election. The totals of the Zimbabwe disaster under Mugabe are still being tallied: 70 percent unemployment, a total dictatorship, the displacing of productive white farmers and the resulting destruction of productive farms, an exodus of three million Zimbabweans from the country.
n Jimmy Carter has shown a special dedication to the cause of leftist dictators in Central America. He used the full power of the office to undermine and set the stage for the overthrow of the duly elected Anastasio Somosa in Nicaragua, to be replaced by the Marxist Sandanista Daniel Ortega. No matter that the Somosa election had been certified by the OAS. He continues to offer moral support for Marxist dictators Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez.
n The Iran hostage crisis occurred under Jimmy Carter’s watch. From Nov. 4, 1979 until Jan. 20, 1981 some 66 Americans were taken hostage and held in the American Embassy in Teheran. They were released within hours of President Ronald Reagan’s swearing in ceremony. Just prior to his inauguration, President Reagan was asked if perhaps the captors should wait until he became president so as to make a better deal for the captives release. Reagan replied, “That would be foolish.”
n Ex-President Jimmy Carter has been instrumental in the rise to power of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Hugo Chavez was saved from recall by the voters in Venezuela in 2004 with Carter “monitoring” the election. The election was suspicious on many fronts. The exit polls conducted by an independent New York poling firm declared one half hour before the polls closed that Chavez had been defeated. When the official results were announced, Chavez was declared the winner by nearly the exact opposite percentages as the independent poll had determined. Jimmy Carter certified the Chavez victory anyway. Chavez has shown himself to be a continual hater of the United States.
n One of the most serious threats to global security is the nuclear threat posed by Marxist dictator Kim Jung Il of North Korea. In 1994, without governmental authority, Jimmy Carter went to North Korea and brokered a deal with Kim Jung Il that was supposed to keep that rogue state from attaining nuclear weapons. Jimmy’s “negotiation” called for the United States to provide the North Koreans with $4 billion worth of light water reactors and $100 million in oil in exchange for a promise not to develop weapons plus assurances that inspectors would be allowed in. On Aug. 28, 2003 North Korea announced that it possessed nuclear weapons.
n Perhaps the most egregious and far reaching of the Jimmy Carter failures was his bringing down of the Shah of Iran in 1979, to be replaced by radical Muslim cleric Ayatollah Khomeini. The history of Iran is such that a secular government friendly to both the West and their trading partners along the ancient trade routes, such as India and China, had been an important stabilizing element in Mid-east politics for centuries. Jimmy Carter pressured the Shah, a longtime friend of the United States, to leave Iran. Then he denied him asylum and medical treatment. At the same time he supported the fundamentalist Mullahs who opposed the Shah. A religious revolution followed and the rise of Muslim fundamentalism had begun in the Middle East. The terrorism and overall unrest that plagues the world today can be properly traced to this specific failure of the Jimmy Carter presidency. +
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1587065/posts
Hey Leftdog.If we start stringing up our criminals in the market place using the whiplines of oilfield cranes will you you defend us like your Iranian buddys?
Extremist views?
Shit boy.
You aint seen extreme.
Yet.
ET:
Well said.
Although I think the atomic bombing of Isreal is well within the realm of possibility. That country is so geographically compact that a couple of 1 megaton nukes would literally destroy it. Twentieth century nuclear weapons will soon be in the hands of tenth century children.
The only weapon in the Islamofascist arsenal that would work against the Western democracies are the ones you describe. The target will be the principles of the Magna Carta and the United States Constitution. And our own liberal left will unwittingly assist in the attack.
Old Chinese curse:
“May you live in interesting times”
Some valid postings. However, not much talk about what needs to be done or, nore importantly, who will do the “heavy lifting”. The UN won’t do anything and the US probably won’t do more than engage in rhetoric and maybe covert ops. So we now have a scenario where the West lacks the will to do anything and the Saudis and Syrians will feel they need to develop their own weapons programs. WE may very well need a sinking of a ship (?) to give the West a much-needed kick in the arse. Just thinkin…
Right, Mad Mike – Israel could be destroyed. It doesn’t change my point. If any Islamic state actually used a nuclear device, that Islamic state would disappear in a day. My point is that they don’t need to use such bombs to take over the West.
They are a fascist ideology, and their fascism can take over the West in the blink of an eye – because the West refuses to acknowledge that it can be taken over without the use of force. The West is the home of reason, of science, of conclusions based on evidence. The West, therefore, alone has developed science and technology.
The Islamic world hasn’t had a scientific thought since it began; it uses its oil revenues to purchase the results of the scientific mind of the West – including the means to extract the oil, and guns, and nuclear technology – and cars, telephones, the internet, medicine. Everything.
But, the West has moved into a self-destructive mode of relativism, where it refuses to evaluate others (as it did in the colonial period); it refuses to acknowledge differences in ideology, in law, in social infrastructures, etc. Therefore, it cannot comment on the ideology of Islamism – which does indeed denigrate other peoples, denigrates women, denies basically everything within the Western ideology. The West refuses to acknowledge this complete rejection and the Islamic insistence that the West behave ‘as if’ we were all legally under Islamic rule.
After all- with regard to the cartoons, apart from the fallacy of saying that ‘no image of Mohammed is permitted’ (there are lots of images in paintings, etc)..but..this ‘rule’ should be followed by and only by – Muslims. You can’t assert, as the Islamofascists did, that non-Muslims must follow this rule! That’s like saying that all Muslims must go to Church on Christmas Eve!
Islamofascism is sweeping through Europe, using two tools. One, is terrorism, which is geared, not to taking ‘key strategic land’ but to frightening and disorienting the civilian population so that they will not confront Islamism. The other tactic is that multicultural political correctness of the West, which freezes us such that we are unable to confront evil, if that evil is within another culture or religion. We are too ‘politically correct’.
Will we wake up to reality – too late?
A global world fun within Islamofascism is intellectually dead. As I said, Islam hasn’t had a scientific thought since it began; it rejects individualism, rejects questions, rejects the development of knowledge. Our planet and its billions of population cannot survive on a faith-based ideology. So the West has to fight. But, this fight can’t be only by weapons; it has to be a refusal to give up our Western ideology of individualism, the use of reason, of equality, of progress. Will we do this?
Miguel says, essentially, that the West needs another Pearl Harbor to spark the proper action. Where have we heard that before…
ET you are right……
Start saving to pay your jizya.
I think the progressives will be very happy in dhimmitude
The minute Isreal feels the least bit threatened they will make the problem dissappear.
But, Avenger – have the Madrid bombings, the London bombings, the open murders of such as Theo Van Gogh, the Paris riots – have they even caused the European/Canadian West to even, to itself, mutter…”hmm, maybe multiculturalism and our conclusions that all ideas are the same, and all ways of life are equal…hmmm..maybe this isn’t right”. Not a word.
After all – the Danish cartoons were about one of the basic tenets of the West – the right to ask questions, the right of freedom of speech. Those cartoons were asking legitimate questions; namely – why, Mr. Islamofascist, do you insist that you are a peaceful religion, and yet, your followers, in the name of your religion, blow up buildings, trains, restaurants, hotels..???
What was the response? In the West, the immigrant Muslims were silent; not a word. But, the Islamofascists used those cartoons, added three fake ones – and went on a propaganda binge. Asserting that non-Islamic peoples should live under Islamic Law!!! Non-Islamic peoples did not have the right to draw Mohammed! It’s a ‘rule’ in Islam – and why do we have to follow it? And – this tactic totally, completely, diverted attention from the question.
The question remains. Why are you blowing up our people? Why are you setting up suicide bombers to blow up our metros, our commuter trains, our hotels, our restaurants? Why are you killin us, when we ask questions about your religion and your political and social ideology/
What happened? Did the West rise up and assert its right to its own ideology – to freedom of speech, to the duty to ask questions? No. It caved in..
In Canada, the Western Standard was the only hard copy print to publish them. And what is happening? They are being sued by an Islamic imam, for ‘promoting hatred’.
What this tactic means, is that if you ask questions about Islamofascism – which is a political ideology masquerading as a religion, then, you will be attacked for ‘promoting hatred’.
The Islamofascism, which promotes the ideology that the West is depraved, that the Western mode of life is corrupt and ‘must be destroyed’, and which actively engages in terrorist murders – no, we mustn’t accuse it of ‘promoting hatred’. We mustn’t accuse it of harming us. That’s not politically correct.
My point is – that a basic right of the West, which is to question – was carried out within those cartoons. And – the Islamic world rejected this right, hiding behind its religion, and refusing to allow us or anyone, to question its actions.
And – the West caved in. It stopped all questions.
Every nation that has entered the nuclear club has done so by demonstration. Iran is not in yet. Iran will not be in, and her reality should the loons running the show have their way, will be one of bombings or invasion or both. I really do believe that a war with Iran is all but a certainty if they don’t come to their senses soon.
The savages in Iran could get away with using nuclear weapons because the peace fascists in the West would immediately implore the United Nations to step in and stop any escalation of the conflict.
That’s why the West should hit the savages first. Our peace fascists may not like it, but if they want to avoid seeing their friends get whacked then they should go wage peace in Iran right now. Go.
Defense Guy – the ‘demonstration’ hasn’t, except once, involved a war. It has only been a ‘test’. This would be no different with Iran.
My point is that Islamofascism doesn’t need to blow up a bomb to ‘take the West’. It is already doing that, quite rapidly, via the two tactics of (1) terrorism, and (2) its use of the ideology of Multiculturalism..which prevents the West from criticizing its terrorist acts, from criticizing its politcal agenda/religion and from setting up laws against Islamofascism.
Hate to say it, but a number of the Iranian anouncements come across, to me at least, like empty rhetoric. Last week we had announcements about a couple of “super weapons” supposedly developed by them, now this week its the uranium enrichment issue.
That said, it obvious that the free world cannot afford to take chances with these nut-bars. I just hope that the US has good intelligence sources
ET:
I’m agreeing with you on all points!
But to further the debate WRT nuclear weapons, I think you are seeing WMD in the old Cold War context. If a Soviet ICBM rose from a bunker near Minsk and set course for Toronto, we knew it, they knew it, and they knew the silos in North Dakota would be opening moments later. Checkmate. But if a mushroom cloud rises over Isreal, and the weapon was delivered in the trunk of a Toyota Corolla, and no one takes responsibility, who are we going to nuke in response? Millions of innocents in Tehran? North Korea? The Chinese secret service HQ? Tempting as it would be, turning all of the ME, South Asia, and a good portion of the planet into a glass parking lot isn’t in the cards, or Afghanistan would have ceased to exist on 9/12/01.
We are used to thinking of nuclear weapons in a missile-tipped, MAD way. Today they are terrorist weapons. Isreal is the first and closest “Great Satan”, and nutbars like the president of Iran may calculate that they could destroy Isreal with impunity. Which is very important to them!
Thoughts?
Sorry to ramble on… 😉
Kate:
Your page loading seems to hang up on “truthlaidbear.com”. Or is it my antiquated dial-up?
Victor Davis Hanson is like Bush. He is very selective about his facts.
Jimmy Carter followed Nixon/Ford. Nixon had just cut and run in Vietnam. It was a total disaster. They were in the middle of a civil war and didn’t seem to know it.(sound familiar?) The American people were sick and tired of war. There was no appetite for it until 9/11. When Clinton went in to Kosivo, he was berated and called all kinds of names by the Republicans. He was ripped for getting the US involved in foreign wars. Bush was elected on a mind-your-own-business foreign policy. 9/11 changed everything.
NOW you are really historically literate.
Hey Stevie D, don’t you ever get tired of being a partisan mouthpiece for history’s failures?
Known unstable nutbars with nukes. That’s not enough of a problem for you to come off the bash Bush jag long enough to take a breath?
You wanna wait until they nuke somebody, or should we take their toys away now while Tel Aviv still needs streetlights? “We” including Canadians. God forbid somebody should issue live ammo to our guys for a change.
By the way, are you aware of the special problem with a conventional attack on a nuclear armed enemy? He’s liable to nuke your whole frickin’ army in the staging area before you get rolling. Even the Americans couldn’t suck that up, it would wreck their economy.
Theres a Tom Clancy novel where after Iran attack the US with weaponised Ebola, the president drops a smart bomb into the living room of the Iranian leaders house.
It really doesn’t have much to do with the conversation, but it is a nice thought…
Fear is Hope’s little sister. Fear is tied to Hope’s apronstrings.
Is there hope for reform of Islam? +
THE MIDDLE EAST MEDIA RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Special Dispatch Series – No. 1137
April 12, 2006 No.1137
Kuwaiti Reformist: The Muslims � Not bin Laden � are Responsible for the Hatred Towards Them in the West
Kuwaiti Reformer to Muslims: Check Yourselve
Dr. Ahmad Al-Baghdadi, a political science lecturer at Kuwait University, says Muslims themselves are to blame for the West�s distrust. It�s an amazingly clear-sighted piece�but also amazingly rare, because expressing opinions like this can be hazardous in the Islamic world.
�Osama bin Laden didn�t force anyone to go to Iraq, murder its people and destroy its institutions. He didn�t force anyone to murder innocent people in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, America and Europe. Bin-Laden did not tell the Muslims in the West: �Hate the country that gave you shelter when you fled [from your homelands], made you rich when you were poor, fed you when you were hungry, gave you freedom after the bondage you suffered in your Muslim countries, and educated you when you were ignorant.�
�You caused all these catastrophes out of your own choice and your own free will… and failed to repay the kindness [shown to you]. So what do you expect the West [to do] when it sees its citizens being murdered in the name of religion, when it [experiences] hatred in the name of religion and suffers the damages of terrorism [perpetrated] in the name of religion? It is only natural that the West should hate you and tighten the rope around your necks, so you do not �invade it from within� as you declare in your announcements and sermons…
�The truth that we must deal with today is that people in the West no longer trust Muslims in general. The Muslims in the West must therefore sever their ties with the Muslims in the east, and repair their relations with the Western societies by announcing that they accept the humane values on the basis of which they were received in the West. They must also sever their ties with the religious clerics and their fatwas…
�If they fail to do this, they must bear the consequences and the difficulties that will ensue. They must not blame bin Laden and Al-Zarqawi, but [only] themselves for being driven, in ignorance, by the views of the clerics…�
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD113706
via LGF
Distressing times like these call for even more effort to make decisions based on good information. Hopefully Bush and the rest of NATO will make sure they’ve got that information before crossing the Rubicon.
Nobody needs to see a Slim Pickins wannabe strap himself to a Pershing II. Amadinejad’s announcements are intentionally provocative…in exactly the same way things were done with the Danish ‘toons. Meaning that his comments aren’t aimed at Western Nations but Islamic ones.
…can you say “boom boom”?
No – it hangs on my dial-up too, sometimes.
ET
Some very salient well written, & logical posts.
You really summarize the Islamic fascist aggression . The goals, & how there trying to achieve them by a social coup. Control against Civilization & the rights of man. Against the West by its own institutions. The blindness of the MSM, academia, & most of the Western Democracies leaders. Southpark has it right. Most people have there heads in the sand with there bare ass’s sticking up.
I think this line you typed, summed it up in my mind anyhow:
Its stated agenda is to conquer the West. It doesn’t need a nuclear bomb to do this. It can achieve its goals via the destabilization of terrorist ad hoc bombs – and – the West’s multicultural and politically correct ideology.
years of liberal leftist thinking has left us weak, soft & without moral fortitude. Thanks to Moral relevancy & its dissemination in our schools. The liberals have left us a Country of Dhimmi’s. All to keep power perpetually. Now we pay the price of our slumber. Now the butchers bill will be steep.
Keep up the good posts ET. Canadian Sentinel as well.The subjects presented on this site are interesting real time topics.
In reply to MadMike – I see your point, which is – how do you react if you don’t know the source of the bomb? However, I don’t think that the source of a nuclear bomb attack in Israel would be unknown. Intelligence very quickly knew the source of 9/11, for example.
My point is that using such bombs, by any group, is not as successful a strategic option as the two tactics I’m suggesting – which are the old ‘divide and conquer’. In this case, it doesn’t even require a military! How’s that for an inexpensive subjugation of an entire people!
All it requires, is number of ‘nests’ of robots, aka, fundamentalist Islamicists, who have been totally brainwashed. These robotic terrorists will readily use themselves as bombs, and attack population-heavy sites, such as restaurants, commuter trains, etc. There is no set plan; we in the West can’t say – Oh, they’ve attacked A, B and C so far. Next time, they’ll attack D’. It’s random and that instills uncertainty and fear. We are afraid to confront because there is no protection from someone willing to kill themselves, to kill you.
The other tactic they use, is our own weakness, in this postmodern era, which is our notion of equality of groups, our refusal to evaluate the ideology and morality of others, our rejection of universal human values and rights.
So- if ‘they’ wish to kill us because they say we ‘insulted their prophet’, we do not confront them.
The fact that they have a political agenda, wrapped up within the cover of a religion, is something that we refuse to confront. We refuse to ‘call them to account’ for the murders. We refuse to ask questions – and, we refuse to draw that ‘thin line in the sand’ – which cannot be crossed.
Consider how Europe financially supports these Islamofascists – who come to Europe, as immigrants, as refugees, and claim all kinds of welfare and support, who refuse to integrate with the existent European culture, but demand special treatment. Think of Canada – and the FACT that we actually considered, actually thought about – introducing Sharia Law. Instead of flat-out rejecting the introduction of ‘a parallel legal system’ for Muslims-only…we actually thought about it. That’s a chink in the armor.
So- Islamofascism doesn’t need to USE a nuclear weapon. It can derive all kinds of propaganda results by saying it has such a device; this will strengthen the emotional bonds of all Islamofascists. There’s no need to use it. Conquering the West can be done by terrorism and political correctness. That’s all it takes.
One thing – as I’ve said, the Islamic ideology is based around a rejection of reason, of questions, and rejection of progress. It operates, politically, in a tribal mode. Such a mode is totally unable to provide for the economic, legal, health etc requirements of a global population in the billions. Islamism is incapable of science; all they can do is copy what the West invented.
Now- when will the West wake up and realize that accepting this mode, accepting Islamofascism, will lead to the implosion of this planet? I don’t mean by nuclear bombs, I mean by the complete collapse of any and all ability to deal with new diseases, new economic requirements, new…anything.
Here we go……Islamofacist Nazi’s with nukes…bend over folks…..decades of appeasment is about to be shoved up our nether regions!
Jimmy’s been a big help to North Korea’s nuclear weapon program, also…
http://www.cartercenter.org/activities/country44.htm
To put it in a nutshell, as I said in the comments thread of my Husseini-Himmler post as linked above, Iran must be put out of commission, rendered wholly incapable of launching an international strike campaign… preemptively.
From what I’ve been seeing wrt the Islamic world and hearing from Ahmadinejad, I have no doubt he’s going to put all of Iran’s chips into the center of the table and play his hand, hoping it’ll be enough to win. Don’t let him have the chance!
I think China is waiting for Iran, North Korea, etc. to pave the way for its own international imperialistic goals, a la the Nazis. China perhaps sees Ahmadinejad and Kim as “useful fools”…
Always remember who’s the most dangerous enemy: China.
The Phantom
I’m funny that way. I just don’t like half-truth. If half the truth,the half you like, is all your interested in, thats fine. I just never lose hope that someone might want the rest of the story.
Iran doesn’t have a bomb yet. There is enough time for the West to figure out how to respond. This is no emergency.
ET also raises valid points.
And also mentioned something about the 19th century. Could have meant the 20th, wrt understanding kinds of wars.
That reminds me of a report I saw recently of Iran having tested missiles which exploded well above land. The only reason for that, it was analyzed, was for the purpose of an electromagnetic pulse blast (EMP). This would effectively fry all modern technology, circuit boards included, thus crippling pretty much everything in, say, the US, as it all depends on computers and electricity. The result? It would be easier for the enemies to invade, with US defenses severely compromised.
Another reason to take out Iran’s ability to strike anyone.
I say we cannot afford to second-guess. Ahmadinejad is a totally mad religious fanatic, politics be damned. Certainly he must believe there’s paradise waiting for him. To hell with Iran, he probably believes.
Canadian Sentinel – I don’t think that China has imperialist goals of ‘taking over the world’. It most certainly wants to be a top-producing capitalist and industrial country, but, that doesn’t mean also, an imperialist agenda over the rest of the world. Like other industrial countries, it wants resources – and that’s why it’s moving into Africa and elsewhere. This is no different than any other industrial country in the West (USA, Canada, France, Germany, UK, etc).
With regard to your conclusion promoting a pre-emptive strike against Iran, to ‘take out’ its nuclear power. I am uncertain how that would that help. It would enrage the Muslim world – which includes not merely the Arab Muslims but all the bonded immigrants in Europe and elsewhere.
The point of the Iraq War was to remove a dictatorship within the Arab War and allow the people there to develop democracy. The hope is that this democracy will, as in a domino effect, spread through the Middle East. I consider this a wise doctrine. Iran is trying to stop democracy by assisting ‘insurgents’ in Iraq; it is trying to stop democracy by trying to get the West to attack it – that would mobilize all Muslim states against democracy and against the West.
I think that Iran’s ‘muscle-flexing’ has an agenda of trying to establish its dominance in the Islamic world (vs the emerging Iraq, vs Saudi Arabia, vs Syria). Iran is trying to establish itself as the major focal point of Islamofascism. The ‘bomb’ is a PR tactic to attract the allegiance of Muslims – and move them away from desiring the democracy emerging in other Arab states. Iran wants the West to attack, either in fact or in rhetoric, it. Then, it can use this hostility as a propaganda tactic to incite Muslims to a high emotional state – against the West and above all, against democracy.
I also very much doubt the validity of an electro-magnetic pulse strong enough to destroy global communication systems. What is the scientific data base for this conclusion?
Nukem!
how do you react if you don’t know the source of the bomb?
A suitcase bomb, hard to trace the state sponsor, maybe?, but the trajectory of a airborne nuke, we know who you are.
People need to start praying that in these perilous times we never, ever get a Democrat back in the White House. Appeasement and time are on the side of the jihadis and their Bomb For Allah.
steve d, how the hell do you know what Iran has? What have they gotten from Russia’s criminal element over the years? “No emergency”? Share with us your criterion for when it becomes one. Better yet, don’t.
The “civil war” in Vietnam?….only if non-Communist factions in the south were fighting each other. Wrong paradigm. Not the right definition. Not the case. I always enjoy the usual lame thumbnail leftist ignorance of history. You’ve never failed me, steve.
Vietnam made you feel bad, therefore, it was wrong. Hurting the feelings of the Iranians or not giving them all of the useless due process that the UN had extended to genocide everywhere and Saddam until it was too late offends your little effete sensitivities, I guess. Well, stevie, thank God, amoebas aren’t running the White House this time. So sorry.
And Scott Ritter insisted it was impossible for the Iranians to do it…
Steve D.
Would you care to outline how you intend to stop Iran from developing nukes. Easy for you to say, I’d like you to back it up.
“how do you react if you don’t know the source of the bomb?”
The US (and other major players) have the technology to detect the signatures which would identify exactly where the plutonium used in an exploded bomb was manufactured. The problem in identifying who caused the bomb to be detonated is if a country like Iran obtained, say, a Russian nuke and used it for terrorist purposes.
Assuming that Iran is making its own plutonium, I’m sure that the US would be able to trace same in the event of a tragedy.
ET: Electo-Magnetic Pulse is a well known phenomena associated with nuclear weapons exploding in atmosphere.
In addition, to a regular shock wave via pressure discontinuities you also create an electro-magnetic shock wave which will fry your garden variety electronic equipment.
When you set off a nuke this tends to be orders of magnitude larger than the stuff computers and regular electronics gear can handle. I would guess that the “clamps” for voltage spikes in your power bars would be next to useless.
For example, I would doubt that most computer chips in modern vehicles are shielded for EMP.
You can read up on it if you google stuff like the Soviets test at Novoya Zelmya and their Tsara Bomba test of a 50 megton device which was designed to be 100 megatons. Anything in the 1 megaton and up range should be good enough to screw up a lot of gear, not to mention incinerating humans in the vicinity.
I don’t think anyone wants a demonstration.
Hans – thank you for the information. I’m aware of the nature of EMP. My point was that I very much doubt that such an event would destroy GLOBAL communication systems. It would destroy LOCAL systems (and only those that are unprotected) but that’s about it.