The Coming Conflict with Iran

[jgaffney]

Sunday's SF Chronicle had an op-ed regarding the options on Iran for the next administration. Unfortunately, I can't find the item on sfgate, so I'll transcribe the interesting items here:

The military answer presents itself because the other options are hugely unsuccessful so far. The pace of negotiations has produced mild sanctions, such as the European Union's decision last month to freeze the assets of Iran's largest bank. Israel, which is determined to push a hard line on containing Iran, has repeatedly underlined these weak results. In addition, whether the next president is John McCain or Barak Obama, it will take months beyond January's inauguration before a new White House team is ready to deal with Iran. For now, it seems that Iran enjoys all the advantages. A military attack doesn't make sense, and the negotiating table can be ignored. Bush hasn't managed to keep Tehran from moving foward in its weapons work.

Wait a minute! Back that up there. Did the Chronicle editors just say, "it will take months beyond January's inauguration before a new White House team is ready to deal with Iran"? Wasn't that the rap on Bush after 9/11, that he had been given the information on bin Laden months before, yet he failed to do anything about it? Does anyone remember the interregnum, when the Florida results were being argued in front of the Supreme Court, when the Senate was so evenly divided that Tom Daschle actually proposed a power-sharing agreement where the committee chairmanships would be evenly divided between the two parties, when every nomination that Bush sent up to Capital Hill for confirmation was a fight? So, why didn't Bush get the same deference in regards to his response to the 9/11 attacks?

Politics aside, Iran is going to be a problem that won't be resolved by negotiating. How do you negotiate with someone who wants you dead and is not afraid to die themselves? I'm afraid that it will take a mushroom cloud over Jerusalem before Europe will get serious about Iran.

[bolverk]

Even that may not be enough in the long term.

[saunterelle]

Bush had recently been on vacation and seen clearing brush at his ranch in Texas. Shouldn't we assume that his White House team is established and ready if he has the time to take a vacation?

[jgaffney]

Progressives have always had a hard time with the concept of a "working vacation." Saunterelle, can you show that the President was not meeting with anyone while he was in Crawford?

Getting this thread back on topic, though, whoever is in the White House next year will have to face the fact that diplomacy hasn't worked with Iran, and probably won't work in our lifetimes. The Democrats contine to decry "saber rattling" yet offer no alternatives. You'd think they were still the minority party.

[mrroqout]

Jul 8, 2008 13:13:00 GMT -5 jgaffney said:

You'd think they were still the minority party.

THEY ARE...the party that panders to.

The sad FACT is this :

No matter HOW MANY "Mis-Steps" B. Hussein, should have over the course of his four years. The mental illness that the majority of Liberal Democrats have will NOT allow them to DO ANYTHING other than ---CONTINUE TO BLAME BUSH. For ANY and EVERY "mis step" their candidate may have...

[The New Guy]

speaking of b. hussein did you see that he is moving the convention outdoors to mile high stadium so he can continue to play rock star again?

i wouldn't be surprised if a few people get up out of their wheelchairs and walk across the stage.

[bolverk]

Barack was spouting the same old sanction crap for Iran. The funny thing about the Democrat approach to Iran is this, they keep trying the same old failed approach, sanctions, over and over, and expect a different result. The purest definition of insanity.

[jgaffney]

Last night at the Sebastopol City Council meeting, the Council passed the following resolution:

A RESOLUTION OPPOSING MILITARY INTERVENTION IN IRAN

WHEREAS, The President and members of his administration have alleged that Iran poses an imminent threat to the United States, U.S. troops in the Middle East and U.S. allies, and

WHEREAS, these allegations are similar to the lead-up to the Iraq War and U.S. occupation, with the selective use of information and unsubstantiated accusations about Iran's nuclear program and its supply of weapons to Iraqi forces as centerpieces of a case to the American people for aggression against Iran, and

WHEREAS, Iran has not threatened to attack the United States, and no compelling evidence has been presented to document that Iran poses a real and imminent threat to the security and safety of the United States that would justify an unprovoked unilateral pre-emptive military attack; and

WHEREAS, we support the people of Iran who are struggling for freedom and democracy, and nothing herein should be misconstrued as support for the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, but it should be understood that a unilateral, pre-emptive U.S. military attack on Iran could well prove counterproductive to the cause of promoting freedom and democracy there; and

WHEREAS, a 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), representing the consensus view all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, concluded that Iran froze its nuclear weapons program in 2003, and an earlier NIE concluded that Iran's involvement in Iraq "is not likely to be a major driver of violence" there, and

WHEREAS, an attack on Iran is likely to cause untold thousands of American and Iranian casualties, lead to major economic dislocations, and threaten even greater destabilization in the Middle East, and

WHEREAS, a pre-emptive U.S. military attack on Iran would violate international law and our commitments under the U.N. Charter and further isolate the U.S. from the rest of the world; and

WHEREAS, an attack on Iran is likely to inflame hatred for the U.S. in the Middle East and elsewhere, inspire terrorism, and lessen the security of Americans, and

WHEREAS, the Iraq war and occupation has already cost the lives of over 4,000 American soldiers, the maiming and wounding of over 38,000 American soldiers, the death and maiming of over one million Iraqi civilians, and

WHEREAS, the Iraq War and occupation has cost U.S. taxpayers more than $500 billion, depriving our cities of much-need funds for services and infrastructure, and

WHEREAS, except at our peril, we cannot ignore the history of U.S. government mis-information used to inspire U.S. aggression in Vietnam and again in Iraq, as embodied in the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and more recently in the what we know now as false claims of weapons of mass destruction, and

WHEREAS, any conflict with Iran is likely to incur far greater costs and divert more precious national resources away from critical human needs, now therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED, that the undersigned Mayors hereby urge the Bush Administration to pursue diplomatic engagement with Iran on nuclear issues and ending the violence in Iraq, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the undersigned Mayors urge Congress to prohibit the use of funds to carry out any military action against Iran without explicit Congressional authorization, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that suitable copies of the resolution be forwarded to President George W. Bush and all members of Congress.

Now, I'm all for avoiding conflict whenever possible. War is never fun. And, any war with Iran promises to be especially nasty.

However, as I pointed out in other posts, Iran is an especially difficult nation to deal with. Not only do they continue to defy the western world with their nuclear program, but they also continue to support the terrorists, call for the destruction of Israel, and generally thumb their collective noses at all of us in the West.

In dealing with a problem child like this, you never want to take the military option off of the table. Otherwise, any pressure or threats you try to bring to bear will be seen as hollow because there is no credible threat to back them up. This resolution continues to tell Iran that America is not a serious nation, and they can continue to get away with whatever they have in mind for their nuclear program.

Unfortunately, it will take a mushroom cloud over Jerusalem before some people will admit that Iran is a threat to our way of life.

[bolverk]

Even with ballistic missiles flying through the air, progressives/liberals/neosocialists like those in Sebastopol will live in denial of the truth. They believe sanctions will work, forgetting that they have already failed.

[saunterelle]

It's a damn good thing John McCain won't be elected President. Do you really think America can afford another quagmire in the Middle East?!

[mrroqout]

Jul 9, 2008 14:05:34 GMT -5 saunterelle said:

It's a damn good thing John McCain won't be elected President. Do you really think America can afford another quagmire in the Middle East?!

Oh of course not.

Let's sit Idly by and watch the light show over Israel.....

[saunterelle]

No, better yet, lets send our strained American troop force to Iran to fight a war where thousands will die and lets sell half our country to China to pay for it. Freakin dimwits!