THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VI, Issue # 197, September 6, 2004
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
IRAN'S NUKES: NOT IF, BUT WHEN
By Alan Caruba
FULL STORY:
If you want an object lesson in why Senator John Kerry’s assertion that the United States government should be working with allied
and other foreign governments and with the United Nations to solve problems relating to threats to the U.S.A. and to American
national interests around the world is simply wrong, wrong, wrong, I direct your attention to the nation of Iran.
Diplomacy is not working. The threat of United Nations sanctions is not working. Three nations, Britain, France and Germany, have
been meeting with the ayatollahs who run Iran, and the result has not been satisfactory. As Washington Post columnist,
Charles Krauthammer, recently noted:
“They [Britain, France, and Germany] have been led by the nose. Iran is caught red-handed with illegally
enriched uranium and the Tehran Three prevail upon the Bush administration to do nothing while they
persuade the mullahs to act nice.”
These are not nice people. Just ask the 69 million Iranians who chafe under their oppression. These are the mullahs who took American
diplomats hostage in 1979 and held them hostage for 444 days. They have been in a virtual state of war with both America and Israel
ever since.
Even The New York Times has taken notice. On August 8, 2004, an article headlined “Diplomacy Fails to Slow Advance of
Nuclear Arms” by David E. Sanger reported that none of the efforts involving America's European and Asian allies has managed to
achieve anything with either Iran or North Korea. In the words of one unidentified administration official, the only option left is to
“disrupt or delay as long as we can” Iran efforts to develop a nuclear weapon.
So it is not if they do have nuclear weapons, but when they do have them. And then it becomes not if, but when, the United States
decides to remove this menace with a few well-placed bunker-buster bombs.
If the lessons of history are any indicator — and they always are — there is only one option left. Iran’s nuclear facilities must be
destroyed by military action. Or to put it another way, by preemption of its ability to begin producing nuclear weapons. One wonders
what the critics of preemption, some of whom claim the U.S.A. was “misled” into invading Iraq, will say about an Iran that acquires the
ability to threaten their neighbors, destroy the entire nation of Israel, and possibly even threaten American cities with suitcase
A-bombs.
For those who have short memories or none at all, Saddam Hussein was deterred from his own nuclear weapons program when, on
June 7, 1981, Israeli F-15 and F-16 fighter-bombers took off from Etzion Air Base in the Sinai and destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor
under construction. The French were building that reactor for the Iraqi dictator. Today, it is the Russians who are helping to build
Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Why would a nation that sits atop huge reserves of oil and has the second-largest natural gas reserves in the world after Russia need
nuclear power to generate energy? The answer is they do not. The only reason for nuclear facilities is to acquire the ability to threaten
its neighbors. Both Pakistan and India have such capabilities, and they managed to scare each other so badly last year that even they
have gotten together to defuse the situation.
Having a nuclear weapon and being willing to pay the price for using it are two different things. The problem with Iran, however, is that
they work from the same playbook as Osama bin Laden. The ayatollahs would use these weapons, on missiles or delivered by some
other means, to destroy their declared enemies. In the case of Iran, diplomacy has failed because you cannot cut a deal with lunatics
who take their orders from Allah.
Complimenting or facilitating the outcome is the fact that the U.S.A. now has a large number of its troops in Iraq and will, for the
foreseeable future, continue to have troops there. America has troops in other Middle Eastern nations as well. Senator Kerry has
promised that, if elected President, he will withdraw U.S. troops as quickly as possible. This is a promise for which, I’m sure, the
Iranians are quite grateful. But they are not grateful enough to stop their efforts to acquire nuclear weapons that pose a direct threat
to our nation.
Moreover, Israel is on record saying it will never permit Iran to reach the point where it can manufacture or deliver nuclear weapons.
Attacking Iran, however, would be impossible without the tacit permission of the United States. There is no way the Israelis could
send their bombers across Iraq to get at Iran’s nuclear facilities without the U.S.A. granting the access they would need. It will not
happen.
Which leaves the job to the United States of America. At some point after the election, assuming that President Bush is reelected, the
preemptive option will have to be used. One scenario would be to first destroy North Korea’s facilities as an object lesson. Is there an
alternative? No. Diplomacy has failed. United Nations posturing has failed. And the threat is too real to ignore.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East & the Problem of Iran
The Middle East & the Problem of Iraq
The Problem of Rogue States:
Iraq as a Case History
The Threat of Radical Islam
War & Peace in the Real World
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, Communications Director of the American Policy Center,
and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly
column, "Warning Signs," posted on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center
(www.anxietycenter.com). A compilation of his past columns, entitled Warning Signs, is published by Merril Press. In addition
to Warning Signs, Caruba is the author of A Pocket Guide to Militant Islam and The United Nations vs. the United States,
both of which are available from the National Anxiety Center, 28 West Third Street, Apartment 1321, South Orange, New Jersey, 07079.
Copyright 2004 Alan Caruba
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VI, 2004
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy