Friday, March 30, 2012
Thursday, March 22, 2012
These are the victims of another muslim murderer. An eight year old girl and two young boys, 6 and 3, along with the Rabbi who was their father. Killed by a 23 year old subhuman follower of Mohammed, named - strangely enough - Mohammed Merah, an Algerian muslim living in Toulouse, France.
Read: "A man can quench his sexual lusts with a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. Sodomizing the baby is halal (allowed by sharia). If the man penetrates and damages the child, then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister. It is better for a girl to marry when her menstruation starts, and at her husband's house rather than her father's home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven."
- Khomeini, "Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990
“It is not illegal for an adult male to 'thigh' or enjoy a young girl who is still in the age of weaning; meaning to place his penis between her thighs, and to kiss her.”
- Ayatu Allah Al Khumaini's "Tahrir Al wasila" p. 241, issue number 12
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Let me break it down for Ed Morrissey, and all of the other pundits in that social circle so that you can get your heads around this. We are concerned and even, dare I say it, panicked, because we can see the big picture of the Obama regime for what it is. We can take the totality of the dataset and draw not just a logical, reasoned conclusion, but a conclusion that is supported by centuries - nay millenia - of past precedent. We are, as Patrick Henry put it, "willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."
Why is the 3/16/2012 Executive Order worthy of grave concern? Simply put, because of the man and the regime who issued it. This is a man, and a regime that has done the following:
-Sent the Secretary of Defense (Leon Panetta) to Congress to put them on notice that despite the explicitness of the Constitution, the consent of the Congress to wage war will neither be solicited nor required by the Commander in Chief or his regime. The CiC and SECDEF may, if they feel like it and can find the time, MAY inform the Congress of "kinetic military actions" henceforth.
-Declared the First Amendment null and void by mandating that every American must, as a condition of legal residency in the United States, pay for abortions. Mr. Morrissey, being a Catholic, you should understand that what the Obama regime has done is demand your very soul. In order to remain corporeally "free" in the United States of America, you must enter into mortal sin, reject Jesus Christ in totality, turn your back on your Crucified Savior, excommunicate yourself from the Church, and consign your immortal soul to eternal hell. If that isn't the prohibiting of the free exercise of religion, then nothing is or ever could be.
-Committed acts of war upon the sovereign nation of Mexico and her people, willfully arming narco-terrorists with the intent of using the optics of hundreds if not thousands of brutally murdered Mexicans in order to stir up and justify the overthrow of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. This is textbook sedition.
-Has coordinated with regime cronies in the Legislative Branch to enable the Obama regime to operate for an entire term WITH NO BUDGET WHATSOEVER. In this time, the Obama regime has looted the United States Treasury and debased the currency of the United States to the tune of SEVEN TRILLION DOLLARS, or roughly one-half the gross domestic product.
This is just a very, very, very short list. Additionally, with each passing day it is being further revealed that EVERY SINGLE PERSON Barack Obama has ever associated with has been not merely a Marxist, not merely a Socialist, not merely a Communist, but a TOTALITARIAN hellbent on the destruction of the United States of America.
I'll concede the point that if this Executive Order was issued by - get this - Jimmy Carter or even Bill Clinton, I could buy the idea that it was merely an emergency protocol housekeeping item of some sort geared toward the reaction of the Federal Government after a nuclear attack. I'd be skeptical, but I would be open to the argument.
Not so now. These people are totalitarian tyrants who are no longer even trying to hide their intentions. See the bulleted items above. There comes a point where you have to pull your head out of the sand, synthesize a massive dataset into its obvious, coherent output, and be willing to know the worst, and to provide for it.
Denying the obvious, even when the obvious is horrific, is not some sort of virtue. Keeping people numb to reality and drunk on a sugary treacle of distraction and reassurance that "everything's okay" even when every iota of data and experience tells us that everything is NOT OKAY is not a virtuous public service. It is a massive failure in charity, both towards those who are misled and falsely-consoled by your assurances, and toward those whose intellects and intentions you backhandedly insult.
Remember, people exactly like Ed Morrissey and his ilk were calling everyone warning of Hitler's danger to mankind "alarmist", "conspiracy theorists" and "paranoid" up until 4:40 am on September 1, 1939 when the Luftwaffe attacked Weilun. And before that mess was over, 70 million human beings were dead. The hell that the Obama regime is determined to unleash on the world will make World War II look like a mere bar fight.
Yeah, I'm sorry I can't tell you the day, hour and minute that open war is going to break out, both overseas and here in the homeland, or the exact date, time and high-tick in the markets before the entire system implodes. There is a name for people who claim to know exact dates of future events - they're called CHARLATANS. If that failure makes me non-credible and paranoid, then I wear that sash with pride, and am consoled and flattered by the caliber of the company of Jeremiahs and Cassandras throughout history that I join. But I do know that it is coming, and that the NDRP Executive Order of 3/16/2012 is, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE DAY AND THE REGIME THAT ISSUED IT, entirely ominous and certainly tactical.
I'll leave you with the video of Larry Grathwohl, which can never, ever be posted, spread and publicized too much. Recorded in 1980, when Barack Obama was nothing more than a drug-addled foreign student at Occidental College and not yet even a glimmer in the eye of the Totalitarians who would later adopt him as their public persona, Grathwohl recounts conversations led by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, the founders and leaders of the Weather Underground, the Marxist-Communist-Totalitarian terrorist group that Grathwohl was tasked to infiltrate, and the eventual intimates, ghostwriter and political handlers of Barack and Michelle Obama. The Totalitarian cabal that runs the Obama regime has intended, for decades, to collapse the United States, overthrow it, establish a Totalitarian oligarchy, and as a necessary corollary to that, murder at least ten percent of the population as "die-hard, unreformable capitalists." In 1980, that 10% worked out to 25 million human beings. Today, it would be 31 million - but heck, what's another Holocaust (6 million) give or take?
Today, you are either Churchill or you are Chamberlain.
The Obama administration appears to be preparing for a long drawn out war in the Middle East, or at the very least, an expected crisis that will require the need to override Constitutional authority and claim dominion over all resources in the United States under the guise of national defense. With the rise in Disaster Preparedness growing for both individuals and states leading up to yesterday's Executive Order, the mood of the nation points strongly towards some event or disaster that will require massive preparations on a national as well as local scale."
I realize that some of the (few) readers of this blog (my liberal family members, for certain :-) have probably come to the conclusion that I am a conspiracy theorist, based on some of the things I believe concerning our government and our economy, such as the growing Change of our country from a Constitutional Republic (NOT a democracy) into a socialist "paradise" as envisioned by Obama and the Marxists (Anita Dunn: Mao "is my favorite philosopher") with whom he has surrounded himself. As I have mentioned before, however, summing up the things Obama has said and done can only lead a reasonable person, one who isn't afraid to face the facts, to believe that he truly does want to turn America into a socialist state.
Considering this strong belief, added to his very real and highly publicized willingness to ignore both the Constitution and Congress, it is my fear that he will use an attack upon Iran, and any military action that occurs in response to such an attack, as am excuse to suspend elections and use this Executive Order to take total control over this country, as Woodrow Wilson did during WWI, and as Lincoln did during the War Against Southern Secession ( a very un-civil war, where 650,000 Americans died to keep the South from leaving the Union).
I hope I am completely wrong, folks, but for those of you who are willing to accept for a moment that I might not be, I suggest you begin making preparations. Preparations to feed and care for your family, and preparations - if you wish to keep the food and other property that you lay aside for your family - to fight the agencies that may come to take it from you. Because this Executive Order does indeed state (unConstitutional though it may be) that the government - DHS and the other agencies mentioned in the EO - has the right to take control of ALL property in this country. Water, food, fuel, all other commodities, manufactured goods, the factories and companies that make goods or provide services, EVERYTHING. And the EO states that this can occur in peacetime, so in a time of war - even against a small country such as Iran - the government will certainly feel justified in whatever steps they decide to take to control all of the resources available.
That is not an exaggeration, people. The text of the EO is available for anyone to read, and it cannot be construed in any other fashion. Total control to the government of all resources. And just as they have decided that the Commerce Clause applies to everything, not just the commerce between states, they will decide that they will control all of the resources available, including the food in your garden and the water in your well. They may even decide that the resources consisting of your labor are theirs to take, too, meaning that they can put you, your wife, perhaps even your children to work at whatever labor or jobs they wish.
Those of us who have spoken out against the government as it currently is, perhaps any of us who are registered as Republicans, may find ourselves digging ditches, or moving barrels of toxic nuclear waste at Hanford in Washington State. Or, perhaps, we will be starved, as the kulaks were starved in Stalin's Russia, when all of the food resources in the Ukraine were removed to be used elsewhere, causing the deaths of millions of the Ukrainians that Stalin wanted to kill. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
The primary difference is that America was pretty much in support of the war effort during WWI. I think the majority of Americans will not be in support of the US being involved in attacking Iran (although many of us will approve of Israel doing so, in her own defence). So, if our government gets involved militarily - and Obama and Holder have both said they do not need Congress's approval, in spite of the Constitution clearly stating that they need it - it is likely to cause them to use this EO for taking control of the economy and all property that exists in America. It will very likely also cause enough civil unrest that they will declare martial law and suspend elections. Because there are many of us - millions - who will fight if Obama and his administration establish the kind of dictatorship that this Executive Order would enable. "National Security" would not be a good enough excuse for us to permit such tyranny without an armed response.
I will make one other prediction while I am at it: to reinforce their excuse for declaring martial law, suspending elections and implementing this EO, we are likely to see some sort of false-flag operation, such as an attack upon one of our nuclear power plants or perhaps even the use of a low-power nuclear weapon (such as a tactical "suitcase nuke") on U.S. territory, blamed upon Iran as being in retaliation for our involvement in attacking them, along with Israel.
Again, I cannot imagine anyone being more pleased to discover I am wrong than I would be, but I feel pretty certain this will indeed happen. Let us all pray that I am simply a paranoid fool.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Monday, March 12, 2012
Sultan Knish at his blog hits another one over the fence. In his post, "The Blood Price of Afghanistan", he speaks to the fact that our men and women in the military are dying because of Oabama's need to appease the muslims. They are dying because they have Rules Of Engagement (ROE) that demand they simply retreat when fired upon, dragging their dead with them. They are dying because the blood price for killing American soldiers is cheap, half the price of killing a muslim.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Some of you folks who know me know I am not religious. I have spoken before of having been raised as a Roman Catholic, including baptism, First Communion, and Confirmation. At thirteen, I chose to leave the Church, and have been a non-believer since that time.
On Kerodin’s blog, iiipercent.blogspot.com, on the topic of helping Israel in its problems with the muslims, he spoke of feeling a moral obligation to help a friend who was being attacked.
We in the IIIpercent are a pathetic group if we can't see who our friends are, can't tell who is worth helping and who isn't. I suppose some of these folks were raised the way Mel Gibson was, by fathers or mentors who think Jews don't count, even if they live in Israel and aren't "polluting" America over here. People who have bought the lies and distortions about Jews, the Tri-Lateral Commission, the Rothschilds, and all the other things Jews have been condemned for, for which they’ve been made the scapegoat. (Schumer is a Jew, too, but I don't blame the rest of them just because he is a lying scumwad.)
One commenter - anonymous, of course - posted (or is that, "whined"):
Even though I'm going poor I alway give my friends money, but they still always spy on me.
This is one of the more common “I hate Israel” notions, that our government has given them some money and those ungrateful wretches have repaid it by spying on it.
The money we have given to Israel - compared to the trillions we have spent on the "Palestinians", Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Malaysia, and everywhere else the muslim scum live that the liberals in Congress and the fools in the White House just love to give money to - isn't a fart in a hurricane. And if I had a "friend" who kept stabbing me in the back, and taking the side of my enemies, you bet I'd spy on him, just to make sure I know which hand the dagger is in.
The American people are the friends of Israel, not our government. Israel NEEDS to spy on those bastards in our government, just as we Patriots need to spy on them and get some idea of where they are going to screw us next.
Back when Loughner killed those people in Tucson, including a young girl, a guy on a list I used to belong to wondered out loud if folks who were carrying concealed should get involved when something like that happens. My response was that, when women and children are being killed, anyone who wouldn't get involved - especially an armed individual - needs to go get some balls grafted on. That it was a question that should never even need to be asked.
That is how I feel about Israel. That country has been assaulted, beaten, raped, and then told that they brought it on themselves. Like telling a rape victim she shouldn't have dressed so "provocatively". Kind of like we have been told we brought 9/11 on ourselves, because we were so mean to the poor widdle muslims of the world.
The bad guys, the gang, that beat and raped Israel have told her they are coming back. They have told her they are going to sodomize her and then kill her. We were there when this gang told her they were going to do it, but G-d forbid we should get involved. Yet, when her father and brothers start talking about bringing the fight to the gang _before_ the gang can kill her, we tell them it would be wrong. That they can't go after the gang until the gang actually tries to kill her, even though we know that this will mean she is likely to die.
Our government - this bastard Barry that we all know is a usurper and a fraud - is the “we”, the "cop" that says that Israel's family cannot "take the law into their own hands". (Although in all fairness, this was going on even before, thanks to anti-Semite Jimmy Carter, and the Bush boys. It is just much worse now that we have a muslim-loving President.) The government even told them they would stop them if they saw their jets moving into the gang's territory.
The gang has the local courts (the U.N.) in their pocket, too. Israel’s family knows they will be condemned, tried and convicted, if they move against the gang.
Some of the family (the weak-kneed liberals - you know, you’ve got some in your family, too) don’t want the father and brothers to fight back. “Just give them what they want, and maybe they’ll leave us alone.” The father and brothers know how well that worked out, the last time they tried it. Besides, this time the gang isn’t talking about beating and raping Israel, but killing her. They simply can’t take that chance.
Here is another thought, especially for those of you who might be white supremacists (based on some of your comments and on some of your own blogs) or at least separatists (“let’s not get involved with those people”):
In a way, Israel is like Randy Weaver. Weaver didn’t want to kill all Jews or blacks or Mexicans or Catholics. He just didn’t want to be forced to mix with them. So he found himself a place out in the boondocks of Idaho, to remain separate and live his life in peace. (We all know where that got him.)
Israel wanted a place of its own, not because it hated the world (although G-d knows they certainly had reason to hate a lot of it), but because they thought they might be left alone if they took some nasty desert land that was given to them and lived their own lives away from the rest of the world (Britain was trying to move them onto the "reservation", like we did with our Indians). But the Arabs, the muslims, simply couldn’t leave them alone. They continued to attack them, as well as craving the land that the Israelis turned into green pastures, date groves, and a viable, thriving economic community. (And for those of you who just can’t let it go, who want to whine and snivel that those damned Jews stole that land from the Palestinians, tell me on what date you intend to turn your house and all of your land over to the Native Americans we stole this land from. Then tell me what you plan to do about the land and homes the Arabs stole from the Jews who lived in parts of the Middle East where they were kicked out by those Arabs.)
Our relationship with Israel, as far as I am concerned, is like that of us here in the IIIpercent community. We don’t have to love one another, we don’t have to like and accept everything the other guy believes, but if we want to restore our Constitutional Republic, we need to work together. Not just let the other guy go his own way, but work together. None of us can have any effect on our own, and we may be too few even if we do work together.
Israel and America are the only Western-style republics in existence. Britain, while still our ally and still a worthwhile country, in spite of its government’s embrace of socialism, is not a representational democracy, let alone a republic (I suppose it never really was), although they do remain a people and a culture worth supporting. Israel is more like us, and definitely worth aiding. Doesn’t mean we have to go to war, or send troops over, but weapons and technology and intelligence should certainly be on the board. We should be working together with her to try to keep from being overrun by the muslims. For all intents and purposes, Israel is our only ally against the muslim horde, against their plans for a Universal Caliphate.
More importantly, Israel could become the “France” we in the IIIpercent movement need, as the Founders needed France during AmRevI. There might well be those within her population, within her military or intelligence community, who would be willing to aid us in overcoming a Marxist government, and perhaps a (in the near) future Marxist dictator who has decided that usurping the Presidency simply wasn’t enough.
Bottom line for me: Israel is a friend, one I would physically go over and fight for, if I weren’t an old cripple. I have supported her with money and with a willingness to defend her against all of her enemies, foreign (over there) and domestic (right here).
If you are interested, further thoughts on Israel defending herself can be seen here:
Friday, March 9, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
I came across this web site today which posted a bunch of graphics concerning current events and the shape of things here in America. I will include them here for your viewing pleasure, as well as the hope that they will either resonate with the beliefs you already hold, or will make you stop and think about where we are and where we are heading.
Monday, March 5, 2012
For those folks who claim that Iran not only doesn't have a nuclear weapon, they aren't even trying to enrich the uranium they have, please read this report:
Report: Iran and North Korea collaborated on nuclear tests in 2010
The great irony here continues to be that their mutually exclusive ideologies would be duty-bound to attempt to annihilate one another if they came into competition. But for now, North Korea needs cash, and Iran wants the bomb.
They have collaborated both on computer technology that could help design nuclear weapons, and on missile technology, so there is no reason to believe they would stop there.
"Report: Iran held nuclear test in N. Korea," from YNet News, March 5:
Germany's Die Welt newspaper reported Sunday that Iran held at least one nuclear weapons test in North Korea in 2010.
The paper's report is based on "Western intelligence agencies sources," and says that the test, in fact, refutes US intelligence assessments suggesting there is no "hard evidence" that Iran is building nuclear weapons.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has recently declared that its nuclear negotiations with Iran have failed.
The statement followed Tehran's decision the bar IAEA inspectors from what is believed to be key military sites in the Islamic Republic.
Iran vehemently claims that its nuclear program is meant to serve civil, peaceful purposes only.
The Die Welt noted that evidence of the 2010 nuclear tests in North Korea was published in early February in Nature Magazine.
According to the report, Swedish nuclear physicist Lars-Erik de Geer analyzed data "showing the presence of radioisotopes that betrayed a uranium bomb explosion."
"After a year of work, (de Geer) concluded that North Korea carried out two small nuclear tests in April and May 2010 that caused explosions in the range of 50–200 tons of TNT equivalent.
"The types and ratios of isotopes detected… suggest that North Korea was testing materials and techniques intended to boost the yield of its weapons," the report said.
So. If we accept that Iran may indeed have, or are close to having, nuclear weapons, then it follows that they have, or will have, the ability to completely destroy Israel with a single pre-emptive strike. It is certainly possible, as I have posted before, for Iran to flood the skies of Israel with so many rockets, missiles, and aircraft that any nuclear weapons launched could successfully strike Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Haifa, or elsewhere.
Few people here in America realize how tiny the nation of Israel is in land mass. The entire country, including the desert area near Sinai, is only 258 miles long. The part where people actually live, from Gaza in the south to the Golan Heights in the north, is only 120 miles long, and 60 miles wide.
Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are only about thirty miles apart. Haifa is only about 75 miles north of Tel Aviv. A nuclear weapon detonated between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem would destroy both cities. Another detonated above Haifa would basically complete the total destruction of Israel and probably 90+% of her citizens, Jew and Arab alike.
It doesn’t matter that Israel could retaliate and wipe out Iran, Syria, and perhaps other parts of the muslim Middle East. They would be gone. A country totally destroyed, her people annihilated. As the current census is approximately 8 million, and 75% of that census is Jewish, we would be talking about the deaths of another 6 million Jews. Not to mention about 1.6 million Arabs.
Another 6 million Jews at risk from a madman who swears he will wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Who has repeatedly stated not simply his intention, but his plan to do so. A man who is actively seeking, irrespective of his denial that he is attempting to produce nuclear weapons, to possess such weapons. Perhaps he is even telling the truth about not producing them, because he has discovered it is much simpler to acquire them from North Korea or elements of the Russian military seeking cash.
This is akin to having a neighbor who has sworn to kill you, your wife, and your children. A man who has the ability to purchase the weapons to do so, and who has been observed at a gun range, practising his shooting, trying out a couple of firearms. Would you really want to simply sit at home and hope that he doesn’t really mean what he says? When he has already paid numerous gang members to vandalize your house, terrorize your family, perhaps having killed your dog, or - G-d forbid - has already killed a member of your family?
Iran has subsidized much of the terrorism, many of the deaths, that Israel has experienced. It has threatened to follow up this repeated violence with wiping Israel off of the map. Don’t you think Israel has the right to defend itself against a very real, a clear and present danger?
Friday, March 2, 2012
...That Israel is ranked 2nd in space sciences.
...That Israel is one of the eight countries in the world capable of launching its own satellites.
...That Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin.
...That Israel has the 3rd highest rate of entrepreneurship amongst women in the world....The proportion of women among R&D workers in Israel is approximately 23.4%. This puts Israel in second place behind Denmark. Women earned 37% of all degrees granted in science and engineering in Israel, one of the highest proportions in the world.
...That Israel has attracted the most venture capital investment per capita in the world, 30 times more than Europe.
...That Israel leads the world in patents for medical equipment.
As I have mentioned before, Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain for you illiterati out there ;-) wrote of the many contributions Jews have made to civilization, and Israel is certainly continuing the tradition.
There are those who remain angry because Israel attacked one of our ships in the past. I do not have enough information to claim - as they do - that it wasn't an accident, like when our military shot down an airliner full of innocent people. Or like when our military bombed the Chinese embassy in the Serbia in 1999. Or any of the other "friendly fire" incidents our military has engaged in. They insist it was intentional - against all logic - and feel it is necessary to hate Israel, or at least to turn away from her because of that mistake. Or perhaps simply because they don't have too much use for Jews.
Israel is our friend, and the only western style democratic government in the Middle East. The only one which would bring stability to that area if it were possible to do so, in the face of all the muslims who scream for her destruction, and death to all who are not muslim.
Military isolationism is good right up until we allow other state actors to destroy our friends. Should we have reused to aid Britain when Germany declared war upon them? Should we (I mean the American people, not our current President) abandon Britain if they were to be attacked by another country again?
Israel lives under the constant threat of destruction by the muslims who surround her. Iran has spoken repeatedly of its plan - not simply its intention - to destroy Israel. They need to be in a position to defend themselves against that very real threat, which they certainly cannot do if Iran develops nuclear weapons.
Now we come to the meat of this post. Sultan Knish, on his blog, speaks to his assessment of the risk of war with Iran. I will post his article here and state ahead of time that I agree with his assessment.
- FrontPage Magazine - http://frontpagemag.com -
Striking Iran and the Myth of Regional War
Posted By Daniel Greenfield On February 29, 2012 @ 12:50 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage | 72 Comments
In 2007, Israeli Air Force jets crossed into Syria and destroyed an Iranian-backed nuclear reactor. The operation had the backing of the United States and employed intelligence derived from an Iranian defector. There was no regional war afterward. Not even an exchange of fire at the Israeli-Syrian border.
In 1981, Israel struck deep inside Iraq, destroying Saddam’s Osirak reactor. The attack was universally condemned at the United Nations and even by Israel’s allies. Had Saddam used it as the basis for a war, Israel would have had no international support at all. But again no war followed.
Today, Iran and opponents of any attack on its nuclear program hold up the specter of a regional war that will drag in the United States, devastate the region and drive up oil prices. This is the only card in their deck until the mullahs have their own bomb, and it’s an effective card to play. But is any of that a serious risk?
Let’s start by looking at the current state of the Iranian regime. The regime is wildly unpopular at home. It had to use its Revolutionary Guard corps to violently suppress protests against the regime, it does not trust its own military and without troops loyal to it close to home, the regime would be gone faster than you can say Nicolai Ceausescu. (If you have trouble saying that, substitute the fallen dictator of your choice.)
Iran has repeatedly attacked American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan; its terrorists have attacked Israel and Jews around the world, but those attacks amount to terrorism and guerrilla warfare mostly carried out by secondary actors. It’s quite different from committing to a major conflict, which will give the regime a choice between either keeping its loyalist Revolutionary Guard at home and sending unreliable conventional troops off to fight and possibly turn on it, or sending off its trusted troops and leaving its leaders naked to the people’s wrath.
Another option is more terrorist attacks, which are already being carried out anyway. And as their recent attacks showed, Shiite terrorists aren’t all that much better than the Sunni kind. Their latest round of attacks mostly ended with dead terrorists killed by their own bombs. And it is only common sense that a regime this violent and stupid can no more be allowed to have nuclear weapons than Corcoran State Prison should allow Charles Manson to build his own flamethrower.
The only card in the Iranian deck is a naval conflict. The last time it tried one of those, the result was a decisive defeat for Iran, but that was back in the late ’80s. The Persian Gulf is vital to Iran’s assertion of power over the region. It has invested in developing its navy and a strategy that will allow it to take on greater powers.
This scenario is only plausible if we assume that Iran will begin a conflict that it is bound to lose in order to avenge the loss of a nuclear program that it no longer has.
There are two possible attack scenarios. First, Israel carries out a unilateral attack on Iran’s nuclear program. This is the most likely scenario under the Obama administration, which has made it clear that it wants a conflict with Syria, but will not back any Israeli attack on Iran. Second, in a very unlikely scenario the administration, for some reason, changes its mind and decides to take out Iran’s nuclear program.
In the first and likeliest scenario, Iran would have to begin a war with the United States over an attack carried out by Israel. A war that it’s bound to lose. Like the lunatic with the lug nuts, the folks in Tehran are crazy, but they’re not stupid. If they were going to begin a war with the United States over something Israel did, they had plenty of opportunities with Stuxnet and the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists.
In the second scenario, Iran would have the pretext, but that doesn’t automatically translate into an actual conflict either. For one thing, there is the same problem as before. A direct conflict would not end with an Iranian victory. There’s only so much guerrilla warfare you can carry out on the water before the game ends. Without a local civilian population and a vast landscape to hide in, the whole thing implodes.
A naval conflict would be less dangerous to the regime than a ground war, but it would be far more expensive. The Iranian economy is already in bad shape and while the regime will always choose guns over butter, it also needs a certain amount of butter to prevent the regime from being completely overthrown. It also needs credit to buy more guns.
The brief conflict would give the regime a boost at home, but would also demonstrate its unreadiness to take control of the Persian Gulf. It would set back its naval capabilities, impose a heavy price tag and pile one humiliation on top of another.
The Iranian regime is the motherland of terror, and terrorists are natural cowards. They want to intimidate and terrorize their enemies into giving in to their demands while avoiding the consequences. A nuclear bomb is the perfect coward’s weapon because it can be passed along to terrorists, while its mere possession makes retaliation too risky. Without the bomb Iran has to practice the fine art of shaking a stick that it can’t use.
The strangest twist in all this is that some of the most fervent progressive opponents of an attack on Iran are also proponents of an attack on Syria. Reports suggest that Iran actually has sent in a sizable force to help the Assad regime win the civil war. If opponents of an attack on Iran’s nuclear program really believe that it would have devastating consequences, why are they courting a conflict with Iran in Syria?
No one can predict the future, but the best guide to the future is the past. Israel took out nuclear programs in Syria and Iraq without a regional war. Taking out Iran’s nuclear program will require attacks on a larger scale, but the paradigm still holds. Israel and the United States recently took out an Iranian-backed reactor in Syria without it leading to a war.
That doesn’t mean that an attack will not lead to a war, only that it is not the likeliest outcome. And the war panic that is being brewed up serves Iranian interests. Iran’s best hope for buying time is to make an attack on its nuclear program seem as dangerous and costly as possible. That is the only real card it has to play and falling for it lets Iran bluff its way to a nuclear ace.
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com
URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2012/02/29/striking-iran-and-the-myth-of-regional-war/
Click here to print.
Copyright © 2009 FrontPage Magazine. All rights reserved.