Iran: Strikes The Only Choice
I’d bet the deed to my house the Iranian theocracy won’t have a change of heart regarding their nuclear ambitions. If anything, I’d almost be willing to bet that the hard-liners will be issuing a fatwa in the not-too-distant future saying that it is OK for Iran to use nucklear weapons, because their enemies possess them.
Our choice is stark. Accept Iran with an atom bomb or cripple its nuclear program by force. Nothing else will stop Tehran.
States rarely get talked out of instruments of power, especially not fanatic ones. China and Russia will veto sanctions that might really bite, but those would not work anyway. Neither India nor Pakistan abandoned their bombs in response to sanctions. The ouster of Iran’s hard-liners might change things, but under President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader Ali Khamanei, extremists seem more firmly entrenched than a decade ago.
The dangers an Iranian bomb would present are intolerable. Iran is the pre-eminent sponsor of terrorism. Iranian weapons are responsible for a large share of U.S. casualties in Iraq. Our forces in Afghanistan have intercepted Iranian arms shipments to the Taliban. Argentina has indicted Iranian officials for blowing up a Buenos Aires Jewish center. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has said Tehran was behind Hamas’ armed takeover of Gaza. Iran provides haven to fugitive leaders of al-Qaeda. The list goes on.
A nuclear attack by terrorists would be almost impossible to deter. Against whom would we threaten retaliation?
Iran also might launch a nuclear missile at Israel, which Ahmadinejad wants “wiped off the map.” Israel could strike back, but so what? Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani boasted “the use of an atomic bomb against Israel would totally destroy Israel, while (the same) against the Islamic world would only cause damage.” And he’s the “moderate” alternative to Ahmadinejad.
Even without initiating an attack on us or an ally, Tehran would use its nuke as an umbrella over its drive to dominate the Middle East and beyond. Like Lenin and Hitler, Admadinejad has a grand vision. “Thanks to the blood of the martyrs, a new Islamic revolution … will soon reach the entire world,” he crows. Bolstered by nukes, Iran’s aggressive ambitions would not be stopped without a big war.
Only strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities can forestall these terrible scenarios. This would not require a “declaration of war,” an antiquated concept that has not been employed since World War II and rarely before. We would send no troops, conquer no land. Rather, we would act in pre-emptive self-defense.
At stake are supreme issues of national safety. The president alone, as Alexander Hamilton said, is positioned to operate with “decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch.” Of course, Congress can block presidential action, but in this case, most members will be satisfied to stand clear and let the president do what must be done.
Full USA Today article by Joshua Muravchik here.
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
I will interject at the last part of that story where Congress can block presidential action. A US President can wage a war for either 90 or 120 days (don’t remember exactly the number) without any approval from Congress. At the expiration of that period Congress could either stop it or let give the declaration of war (or something equivalent to it).
November 20th, 2007 at 10:03 amThe War Powers Act of 1973
It allows the President to use the military forces for 60 days, without a formal declaration of war by Congress, it grants an additional 30 days upon a formal request by the President, regardless of Congress’s agreement with the request.
November 20th, 2007 at 10:19 amI heard a guy on fox yesterday talking about if we bomb Iran that they would unleash Hezbollah all over the world, I see this as a real threat. We will have to come to a decision soon about taking action them, if we do we better hit them very hard. Im talking a relentless sea and air campaign for days. Bomb the Hezbollah training camps, nuclear facilities, command centers, decimate their air force and AA capabilities. This campaign will make shock and awe look like a local firework show. but it has to be done
November 20th, 2007 at 10:53 amBomb, bomb, bomb
November 20th, 2007 at 11:01 ambomb, bomb, bomb Iran
That infidel Kurt is dead nuts on, let it rip.
the civilized world will bitch and moan and whine following it in public, but will be thanking us in private. Except for Australia, they have stones.
November 20th, 2007 at 12:00 pm“it is OK for Iran to use nuclear weapons, because their enemies possess them.”
I just read that line of reasoning in comments by a number of the Liberals on LiveLeak; the good ol’ blame the Jews crowd, it’s no wonder they never complain about the Democrats having deep roots in the Klan!
November 21st, 2007 at 1:45 amI don’t think the Ds would stand aside.
They will surrender on the beaches;
November 21st, 2007 at 2:09 amThey will surrender in the fields;
They will surrender in the hills;
No matter how badly the troops are beating the enemy,
They will always surrender!