Blogosphere Orange Alert
Mon April 12th, 2004 01:13 MSTWhile the hyenas that make up our press are trying to find red meat in the Bush Administration, and the jackals in the Democrat party are trying every dishonest trick in the book to grab the power of the presidency, there is a big ugly elephant in the room that everyone is ignoring.
IRAN
Iran is the heart of Islamist extremism. Iranian mullahs invented the modern practice of state sponsored Islamic terrorism and the high tech state with the values of the dark ages. Iranian mullahs held our diplomats hostage for a year. Iranian mullahs are today causing the deaths of coalition soldiers in Iraq, while at the same time brutally suppressing their own people. Iranian mullahs cannot survive our success in Iraq, so to them, our work in Iraq is a fight to the death - the mullahs die or Iraqi democracy dies stillborn. Our troops are fighting Iranian armed and led Iraqis at this very moment.
At the same time, Iran is playing a shell game with their program to develop nuclear weapons, hoping to have an IRBM nuclear deterrent before the feckless world institutions try to stop them. Iran has threatened to destroy Israel with nuclear weapons, regardless of Israel’s retaliation (Rafsanjani, 2003).
Meanwhile, in the last few months, Iranian people, who want freedom and to live in a modern secular democracy, are desperately asking for the help of the United States. They are demonstrating, holding strikes, refusing to vote, and of course being murdered, executed and imprisoned in increasing numbers.
The myth of Iranian moderates in government is used as an excuse to avoid action against this very dangerous and vicious government, even as that same government sends killers and money and arms into Iraq to murder our people - soldiers and civililans. The Europeans, including Britain and Russia, see Iran as a source of money, and are ignoring the danger, or in the case of Russia, fueling it with their construction of high powered nuclear reactors.
This must end!
It is time for George Bush to address the nation about the overall situation in the war on terror.
When he does so, he should expose the Iranian actions;
He should expose their aid and sanctuary given to Al Qaeda;
He should remind Americans that Iran has sponsored attacks which have killed many Americans;
Most importantly, Bush should declare his support for the Democratic forces in Iran.
Behind the scenes, if it isn’t being done already, our covert action forces should be aiding in the destabilizaiton of the regime, recruiting support in the Iranian military and training revolutionaries. Our government should aid in the broadcast of information to Iran (and Iraq, as previously suggested), and should provide detailed information and support for the Iranian resistance.
Of course, the negative forces in this country, Democratic Party activists and their pliant press will fail to see the importance of this goal, as they failed to understand the necessity of deposing Saddam. They will blame this on George Bush and try to scare Americans. They will issue their usual platitudes about the need for international cooperation, ignoring the fact that much of the world is abetting the Mullahs for commmercial gain, just as they were on Saddam’s payroll while obstructing the U.S.’s efforts in Iraq.
We must stop the Mullahs;
We have a duty to stop the Mullahs, since we (Jimmy Carter) put these monster in power.
They represent a great danger to our country and to our efforts in Iraq and in the broader war on terror..
Don’t let the press bury this.
Don’t let the administration ignore it.
Also read Roger Simon’s article, “It’s Iran, Stupid! - A Message to the Blogosphere“.
I hear there are literally tons of islamic extremists in France… should we invade that country as well?
I think the country has enough on its plate right now… lets settle Afghanistan and that cluster f*ck Iraq before we start waving the big stick again.
I hope you don’t see this as trolling, I’m not. I just think we need to finish what we start before we start looking for new targets.
Normally I would agree with you.
But this is not a normal situation, and nobody is advocating an invasion (do you see the word in my post anywhere)?
But what you have to understand is the centrality of Iran to the whole problem, which is one of the reasons we chose to attack Iraq in the first place. While the WMD’s were important (they’re probably in Syria now), the pressure we can put on Iran, which has a nascent revolution in progress, is enormous. But the Iranians are, as was predicted long ago, fighting back.
We will have great trouble winning in Iraq if we don’t destablize Iran. Also, while the Iraqis are tribal, relatively primitive from a political point of view, and many have reason to dislike or at least not trust the U.S. (including the Shiites whom we abandoned in 1991), the Iranians want out of the Sharia state. Most of the population wasn’t even born when the Mullahs took over. They have lived their whole lives under the Mullahs and they know they need something better. And Iran is mostly a unified, modern country unlike Iraq.
When you consider that they are also working very hard on nuclear weapons, and that if we don’t stop them, Israel may do have to, causing a cataclysm, we just can’t afford to let things just go.
Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudia Arabia and Pakistan are all connected. We now have forces on three sides of Iran, and if we set it up right, we could quickly come to the aid of an indigenous revolution. The Iranian army also hates the Mullahs, as do many in the police and other armed organizations. We would not end up with a vacuum of organization as we did in Iraq.
But ultimately, remember that we are in a war. Afghanistan and Iraq are merely theaters of operation, not war aims in themselves.
The war aim is to restrain and ultimately destroy Islamic radicalism. We must do this at any cost, because if we don’t, the result will be a conflict with an ICBM/nuclear armed country with leaders not afraid to die and happy to dispatch terrorists with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
We are in real trouble. Not for what we did, but for what we failed to do for the last 20 years. The bill has come due. We can put our heads in the sand, or advocate actions, as Kerry has, that would never work because of the “allies” he would rely on (France, for example), or give up and wait for the nukes to go off or the smallpox epidemics to start.
My choice is to fight. And in Iran, we can do that without direct military attacks. We can use techniques similar to those used so successfully during the cold war by the USSR to overthrow regimes - intelligence techniques and aid to indigenous forces.
If we don’t act, and the Iranians are unable to overthrow the Mullahs, we are condemning the world to an inevitable nuclear war. Whether it starts as ourresponse to a horrible terrorist attack, or the Mullahs start it by attacking Israel, or Israel starts it by attacking Iran’s nascent nuclear forces, it will happen.
So no, I don’t see you as a troll. Many will look at the situation as you do, which is of great concern to me.
And before you write off Iraq as a cluster f*ck, you should go back and look at the very gloomy predictions before the invasion. Remember the millions of refugees expected? Remember Baghdad as Stalingrad? Remember expected WMD attacks on Israel or our troops?
We are doing much better than you might think. You should look at the history of Vietnam and see how the press and nit pickers ruined that situaiton. That was my war. This new one belongs to everyone, because unlike Vietnam, lethal attacks have already taken place in our homeland, and will again.
But if you know any World War II history, look back at it. We are now, as then, fighting against an axis of countries. We didn’t restrict our target list then, and we shouldn’t now. If we have to increase our military, then we should do so. The consequences are too grave.
My question is this: If you and I know that Iran’s ruling mullahs are supporting Sadr and fomenting insurrection in Iraq and basically fighting for there own survival, don’t you think that the administration knows this (and probably much more) and is working under the radar to defeat their aims? They might have good reasons to keep quiet about it.
Paul,
I would certainly hope so. But remember that Washington bureaucracies, especially the State Department and parts of the CIA, don’t like to do this sort of thing and thus make it hard for the Administration to do the right thing or get the right information.
Furthermore, there is no doubt in my mind that Bush does not speak to the people enough. Given the way the press twists anything that comes out of a press conference or an ad hoc session with the press, the President needs to use his “bully pulpit” a lot more to speak directly to the people without going through this filter. Many of his supporters agree. This is also a plea for that.
I sometimes get the feeling that we’re in a life or death chess match where we have to be thinking 12-13 moves ahead. I’m not an expert on Iran, but one thing seems obvious; we have to be the ones to take out the nuclear reactor, and we have to do it before the delivery of the uranium fuel, which is fairly imminent IIRC. Leaving it to Israel will just increase tensions in the region (and they will do it if we don’t).
Beyond that, we have to be ready to react, and we have to make our intentions clear. One of the complaints about Bush I was that when he encouraged the Iraqis to rise up against Saddam, they assumed that he would provide support. Do we support a revolt against the mullahs, and to what extent? Let’s be clear.
We know the Iranians have an active Uranium enrichment program. Hence, I fear that the reactors are part of a strategic deception. Furthermore the destruction of them would be very, very useful to the Ayatollahs because it would allow them to use the “we were attacked by foreigners” trick to increase their hold on the population.
That being said, we need to be able to keep a close eye on the reactors to make sure there are never fuel rods than can be reprocessed (I don’t know enough about reactor details to know if it is possible to effectively “poison” fuel rods to prevent recovery of Pu), to be sure they don’t have a hidden way to expose other Uranium to the neutron flux, and to be ready to destroy them immediately if there is a problem.
I suspect one reason we didn’t do this in North Korea is that we had information that they had another program (their own U enrichment scheme) that destroying the reactor would not stop. It is harder to make a Pu bomb than a U235/U233 bomb anyway, it’s just easier to make the Pu.
Man, this is good stuff. An exchange of ideas about Iran and other matters which presupposes that we are actually in a long-term struggle in the Middle East. This is just the beginning, and I think the expression The War on Terrorism will in a few years give way to The War on Jihad, which is what it is. If only we could get the word to the Democrats…
Pat Curley’s analogy to a chess game is great. I think John is correct too in describing the inertia in our State Department and intelligence agencies, even in cases like the threat from Iran. I guess we have to be confident that they’re on top of this, somewhat.
One group definitely on top of it is the Mosaad, and that is the group to watch. Israel has nukes, but certainly they are end-game devices the use of which would be to take everyone down if they thought it was all over. This would not be Iran’s policy. I do not think that Israel will tolerate a nuclear Iran, nor should we encourage them to accept it.
Bush definitely needs to get out there and start making some noise. To hell with the opposition here. Being nice hasn’t gained anything from the Democrats OR the insurgents. This isn’t a compassionate enterprise. When ex officio or defacto leaders of foreign groups declare their intention to destroy you, and they are supported and harbored by foreign governments, then screw them.
Rhod,
One thing about Iranian’s Mullahs - they are not sane in a normal sense. Read this and you’ll see what I mean.
Rafsanjani, quoted there, is #2 guy in the whole country.
Don’t laugh. I am pretty sure english is not their native tounge.
My Iran
It is probably a polite fiction that Iran does not have nuclear weapons. One of our national treasures in Australia is public broadcaster SBS and they often show non-english documentaries, and in a french documentary it was showed that Iran’s nuclear program goes back to the Shah. The enrichment (60-70’s technology) was done in France but funded by Iranians pre and post Shah. The French were looking for non-USA source of enriched uranium.
Now for the really bad news, thanks to unremitting research mostly by the official nuclear powers only three things are required to go nuclear, time, 100 million dollars and access to Uranium. The centrifuges that all the fuss is being made about is in fact 1940’s technology. Lasers and magnets are the way to go. (It is all on the net.)
IX:
I believe that there are serious pressures for reform underway in Iran. The country is in every way more modern, commercially developed and worldy than Iraq. But in your other posts, you appear to accept a Middle Eastern Power Theory. According to you, the only ruling dynamic among the various tribes there is Strength (one of which would be nuclear). You appear to be making a claim that Iran will come around, so to speak, but this is incompatible with the IXLNX Power Theory. It would seem that an Iranian theocracy with a nuclear capability would hold all the cards.
Which is it? I’ve asked you earlier what you think the future of the Middle East will be, and what role we should play in it. You haven’t answered. You only present evidence that what Mr. Moore says is untrue or flawed but offer no cohesive argument in favor of another approach. Nothing personal here, but Disbelief doesn’t add up to a worldview. Someday you will have to draw a conclusion that has some application to reality.