Archive for August 18, 2010

Absolutely nothing.

With the exception of defending a country’s sovereignty or a people’s way of life or pushing back a tyrant or two here and there.
Yes, I agree, war is a nasty business. If only the dictators and tyrants of the world would let others live in freedom and not force folks to act in defiance of their oppressors.

Other than that, I’m a rainbow and unicorn kind of robot.

Great song though.
Good God Y’all!

George Will, in Jerusalem for the Washington Post, quotes Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu:

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 Iran’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 – 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.”

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.

Question:

Should we strike Iranian nuclear facilities before they load fuel into their reactor or complete their ability to enrich weapons grade plutonium?

Should Israel?

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.

Twitter
Categories
Subscribe via email
August 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jul   Sep »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031