Dealing with Iran
Jim Hoagland says Israel presents a case for it preempting Iran's nuclear program.
"A grim warning from Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to President Bush that Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than U.S. intelligence believes has triggered concern here that Israel is seriously considering a preemptive strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactor."
"Sharon's description of the unacceptable risks of Iran's being able to launch "a nuclear holocaust" comes just as the Bush administration is making headway in constructing a diplomatic containment strategy for the nuclear weapons programs of Iran and North Korea. Unilateral Israeli action against Iran would destroy this strategy and gravely complicate Bush's reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan as well.
"Bush's frequently warring senior policymakers have reached a consensus (now there's news) in recent weeks that the United States has no attractive military options in Iran or North Korea. Instead, Washington must work with its allies to impede these rogue efforts to create nuclear arsenals. Europe and Russia have responded by increasingly distancing themselves from Iran and by joining the Bush team in pressuring North Korea into multilateral talks."
Actually militarily either of thse countries coulb be defeated in much the same way Iraq was. The problem is political. The Democrats and liberals in other countries are too upset by the liberation of Iraq. They would go ballistic if the administration attempted to take effective military action to preempt these countries at this time. The Democrats need another "imment threat" witrh a "smoking gun" to prevoke action out of them at this point. Many of them have already been routed by the relatively weak "guerilla" campaign in Iraq.
Unfortunately, this political attitude by the Dems also makes it more difficult to deal with Iran on al Qaeda operatives they are hosting. While Iran claims they are in custody, there is little proof on the point. If this were a week after the 9-11 attacks and the US found Iran holding al Qaeda operatives, they would have been told to turn them over or share their fate. Now, the Democrats have made such action politically more difficult. They are letting their politics get in the way of defending the country against the terror network trying to destroy the US and the country that is hosting that network, be it in their jails or otherwise.
At some point the US is going to have to go into Iran if it does not implode on its own. Serious consideration should be given to locating the wheereabouts of the al Qaeda operativs being "held" in Iran and sending in the Delta Force to get them.
Jim Hoagland says Israel presents a case for it preempting Iran's nuclear program.
"A grim warning from Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to President Bush that Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than U.S. intelligence believes has triggered concern here that Israel is seriously considering a preemptive strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactor."
"Sharon's description of the unacceptable risks of Iran's being able to launch "a nuclear holocaust" comes just as the Bush administration is making headway in constructing a diplomatic containment strategy for the nuclear weapons programs of Iran and North Korea. Unilateral Israeli action against Iran would destroy this strategy and gravely complicate Bush's reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan as well.
"Bush's frequently warring senior policymakers have reached a consensus (now there's news) in recent weeks that the United States has no attractive military options in Iran or North Korea. Instead, Washington must work with its allies to impede these rogue efforts to create nuclear arsenals. Europe and Russia have responded by increasingly distancing themselves from Iran and by joining the Bush team in pressuring North Korea into multilateral talks."
Actually militarily either of thse countries coulb be defeated in much the same way Iraq was. The problem is political. The Democrats and liberals in other countries are too upset by the liberation of Iraq. They would go ballistic if the administration attempted to take effective military action to preempt these countries at this time. The Democrats need another "imment threat" witrh a "smoking gun" to prevoke action out of them at this point. Many of them have already been routed by the relatively weak "guerilla" campaign in Iraq.
Unfortunately, this political attitude by the Dems also makes it more difficult to deal with Iran on al Qaeda operatives they are hosting. While Iran claims they are in custody, there is little proof on the point. If this were a week after the 9-11 attacks and the US found Iran holding al Qaeda operatives, they would have been told to turn them over or share their fate. Now, the Democrats have made such action politically more difficult. They are letting their politics get in the way of defending the country against the terror network trying to destroy the US and the country that is hosting that network, be it in their jails or otherwise.
At some point the US is going to have to go into Iran if it does not implode on its own. Serious consideration should be given to locating the wheereabouts of the al Qaeda operativs being "held" in Iran and sending in the Delta Force to get them.
Comments
Post a Comment