May 31, 2006
TEMPORARY HAWKS?:
An Apocalyptic Religious Zealot Takes on the World: Iran's mullah-run theocracy is on a seemingly unstoppable course to becoming a nuclear power. The country's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a pious zealot with a penchant for visions, is doing his best to provoke the West. Faced with a choice between acceptance and intervention, America and Europe have opted for diplomacy -- for now, that is. (DIETER BEDNARZ, RALF BESTE, GEORG MASCOLO, STEFAN SIMONS, GERHARD SPÖRL, BERNHARD ZAND, 5/30/06, Der Spiegel)
Conditions in Iran are already nightmarish, a blend of the sermons of hate and efforts to develop the Bomb, a weapon this state, all denials to the contrary, clearly seeks to possess. Iran poses a far greater threat than nuclear powers Pakistan or India because the mullah-dominated state brings together a far-reaching Islamist ideology and an image of the enemy -- that of the Great Satan, the United States, and a smaller Satan, Israel -- all the while promoting a calculated anti-Semitism aimed at building Islamic solidarity in the Arab world.Iran is also far more dangerous than Iraq or North Korea. The theocracy stands a good chance of successfully building weapons of mass destruction. The kind of weapons that, in a figment of Western imagination, Saddam Hussein had supposedly come close to obtaining.
Presumably the threat from Saddam was a figment of the imagination because they opposed the war? One wonders how serious they'd say the Iranian threat was if Gerge Bush, Tony Blair, and John Howard were about to bomb its nuclear program. Posted by Orrin Judd at May 31, 2006 1:40 PM
That's pretty much how it goes in most of the big media outlets on both sides of the ocean. Barring a recent cataclysmic terror attack -- especially one that occurrs anywhere near their offices -- the desire to see and publicize any external threat is in inverse proportion to the likelihood of any immanent pre-emptive attack by the U.S., Britian, et al to eliminate that threat (though in some quarters that formula might be a little less absolute if different politicians who were more simpatico with the big media's social/econimic beliefs were heading those governments).
Posted by: John at May 31, 2006 2:14 PMThe MSM is increasingly adopting the theme that Saddam's weapons of mass destruction were a "figment of Western (read George Bush's) imagination". That will come as good news to the imaginary Kurds Hussein gassed with WMD. I guess this means they get to be alive now.
Posted by: JonSK at May 31, 2006 3:01 PMSo what was it exactly in Iraq that President Clinton had the military bomb in 1998?
"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."
And this bit from the same speech that went down the memory hole as well:
"The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people. Bringing change in Baghdad will take time and effort. We will strengthen our engagement with the full range of Iraqi opposition forces and work with them effectively and prudently."
Rick T.
Clinton solved the problem with one bombing. Start paying attention, will you.
Leftists, if they are capable of anything, have a unique talent for rewriting history on a moments notice. After 9/11 it would have been unconscionable for Bush to allow Saddam to contine in power. (1) Saddam was violating the 1991 Ceasefire and if we had allowed such behavior to continue it would have jeopardized any future ceasefire the US signed with anyone. (2) Saddam was cheating and bribing his way out of the Oil for Food Program, with his Allies the French, Germans, and Russians. (3) he was orchestrating assasination attempts on a former American President. (4) Saddam was aiding and abetting terrorism in Palestine/Israel.
WMD was a mere sideshow, which unfortunately was brought to center stage by Sec. of State Powell, who bored the collective b*tt of the entire world for months trying to convince people on Saddam's payroll (French diplomats, and Kofi Anan) that he wasn't a nice guy. Fat Chance of that succeeding.
Posted by: h-man at May 31, 2006 4:03 PMLet's do the "Iran's not really a threat because all it really wants to do is annihilate Israel, and who could really disagree with that?"
hokey pokey!
You put your left foot in, you take your...
Posted by: Barry Meislin at May 31, 2006 4:52 PM