Last Saturday, Iran was allowed to begin inserting fuel rods into their nuclear reactor without so much as a whimper from the international community. World leaders heaved a collective *sigh* and continued their golf games, vacations and parlor parties while the citizens of the world, the sane ones anyway, were forced yet again to wonder on the competence and/or contrivance of said “leaders.”
Ever wonder what would have happened if Kennedy hadn’t called Khrushchev’s bluff? We’re about to find out.
Just one day (1) uno, one singular day after the fueling announcement comes news of a new Iranian ambassador.
Really? What’s his name?
The Ambassador of Death.
Nice. Gotta hand it to those mullahs, they sure know how to name a weapon.
Hey, I’ve got a better idea. How about something more appropriate? (Warning: tell the children to leave the room.)
How about we call it the “Dildo of Doom?” It would go along with the douche-nozzle who’s running the country over there. Sorry to be so graphic. I’ll revise the name to shall we say, “Marital Aid of Mass Destruction?” Nah, just doesn’t have the same ring of truth.
OK, one more: “Suppository of Subjugation.”
Feel free to add your own suggestions in the comments.
It is also interesting to note that Wired.com is questioning the Ambassador’s size, wondering aloud if Iran is claiming it’s ambassador to be more “endowed” than it really is.
“Is that a WMD in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?”
Each day that passes without taking out Iran’s threat of nuclear armaments is another day closer to World War Three. I’m hoping against hope that a special forces or some other clandestine outfit is making plans to sabotage their facilities.
There is a glimmer of hope though. An unattributed editorial in the Washington Times reports that
… There are unconfirmed reports that Reza Baruni, the mastermind of Iran’s drone program, was assassinated earlier this month when his heavily guarded villa in southern Iran was bombed. On the same day, three unarmed drone aircraft reportedly crashed into the containment dome of the Bushehr reactor…
Still, I’d like to see more than unattributed reports claiming unconfirmed actions of unarmed aircraft causing unknown results.
It’s all a bit… unsettling.
Previously: Should Israel Bomb Iran?
Today’s Middle East, he says, reflects two developments. One is the rise of Iran and militant Islam since the 1979 revolution, which led to al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah. The other development is the multiplying threat of missile warfare.
Now Israel faces a third threat, the campaign to delegitimize it in order to extinguish its capacity for self-defense. After two uniquely perilous millennia for Jews, the creation of Israel meant, Netanyahu says, “the capacity for self-defense restored to the Jewish people.” But note, he says, the reflexive worldwide chorus of condemnation when Israel responded with force to rocket barrages from Gaza and from southern Lebanon. There is, he believes, a crystallizing consensus that “Israel is not allowed to exercise self-defense.”
And yesterday, former US Envoy to the UN, John Bolton said Israel has just a few days to act before Iran begins inserting fuel rods into it’s newly built nuke-you-lar reactor.
Israel has only mere days to launch an attack on Iranâ€™s Bushehr nuclear reactor if Russia makes good on its plan to deliver fuel there this weekend, former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton warned Tuesday.
He said that once Russia has loaded the fuel into the reactor — slated for Saturday â€“ Israel would no longer be willing to strike for fear of triggering widespread radiation in an attack.
Iran in effect is hiding behind human shields while it continues to arm itself with nuclear capabilities:
Iran, for its part, dismissed talk of a possible Israel strike.
On Tuesday, Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast was quoted as saying that “these threats of attacks had become repetitive and lost their meaning.” He also reportedly told correspondents in Tehran, “According to international law, installations which have real fuel cannot be attacked because of the humanitarian consequences.â€
The rhetoric comes as the US increased sanctions on Iran as part of its ongoing efforts to ratchet up pressure on Tehran.
On Tuesday the US Treasury announced dozens of additional names of Iranian banks and individuals that fall under sanctions law.
So, while the Iranians continue to ratchet up their ability to attack our Israeli allies, our President and State department continue to run a racket of sanctions and weak diplomacy designed to look the other way while Israel is forced to defend itself alone.
Should we strike Iranian nuclear facilities before they load fuel into their reactor or complete their ability to enrich weapons grade plutonium?
I believe we should and if we don’t strike first, we should at the very least provide backing forces to Israel when they do so. A nuclear Iran would be more emboldened to act out against our Israeli allies, just as any of the lesser factions surrounding them because of Iran’s implied nuclear umbrella of protection. We cannot allow this scenario to develop.
Will President Obama see the issue this way?
I’d doubt he has a pair. In fact, his previous actions suggest that he’ll use an Israeli strike as a reason to sanction or condemn Israel.
That would be a tragedy of unthinkable proportions.