Thursday, May 11, 2006

Ahmadinejad: Israel 'Regime Based on Evil...Cannot Continue...One Day Will Vanish."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threats against Israel continued Thursday in Jakarta. Details here. The Iranian president also claimed an openness to dialogue with the US between rants and accusations of nuclear double standards in the West. Ahmadinejad finds it unfair that nuclear military powers are seeking to halt his "peaceful" program. Mahmoud, it's not a double standard. We just don't believe you. Besides, the European Plan allows for a civilian program.

I'm sick of this guy and am considering unilateral cybersanctions. His ambitions are clear and I've predicted bits and pieces of this drama as they've unfolded. If our memories weren't so damningly short, I might start ignoring him all together.

When this war starts (no more than one year from now), look for Kosovo-era tactical air strikes on nuclear facilities and ground forces. Don't count on a full-scale invasion at the outset. When the dust clears, Iran will be sliced up like old Germany with Russia and China (if they don't side with Iran) "keeping peace" and sucking oil in exchange for their surprise cooperation. The US and her European allies will eventually occupy, operating from strategic bases in Iraq.

That's one way it might unfold. Iran could also pull a Lybia. That's looking less likely.

On a somewhat related note, be sure to read the previous post and be very, very upset.


Anonymous Chad Hogg said...

But, as I argued in a previous comment ( I am not convinced that it isn't a double standard, regardless of whether or not Ahmadinejad is telling the truth. If Russia, China, most of Europe, and (especially) the United States have active nuclear weapons and we try to say that Iran is in violation of international law by (allegedly) building their own nuclear arsenal, that is the very definition of a double standard.

Can you imagine a situation in which Iran had an arsenal of nuclear weapons and the United States lacked the technology to produce them itself? Suppose further that Iran had recently fought a war against the Canadian government. Oh, and lets say Texas decided to secede from the union 50 years ago, and Iran had been supporting them diplomatically and militarily. I realize this is not really a fair comparison, but I am guessing it is reasonably close to the way the average Iranian citizen views the world. In that situation, would we be content to count on Iran's promises to not use its arsenal? Certainly not. Rather, we would be pushing towards the precarious situation of mutually assured destruction that dominated the Cold War.

In my version of an ideal world, every nuclear-capable nation would voluntarily destroy their nuclear armaments and atomic energy work would be completely transparent. Unfortunately, pandora's box has been opened, and I can't see any way in which it will ever be closed. The best approach I can think of is to develop a robust defense against nuclear attacks, but our current treaties forbid research into defensive weapons.

I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

2:13 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home