Iran so far away

I wish that I could. Iran is steaming towards becoming a nuclear-armed power, and nobody seems to be willing or able to do anything about it: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122298974853900315.html?mod=djemEditorialPage. Let's be perfectly clear, here. A nuclear-armed Iran is NOT the same thing as a nuclear-armed France, or a nuclear-armed Great Britain, or a nuclear-armed Russia, or a nuclear-armed China (or a nuclear-armed Israel). All of those countries are run by people who are if nothing else fairly pragmatic. They are not apocalyptic religious zealots like the Mullahs running Iran and their puppet, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The concept of nuclear deterrence is that one side doesn't want to attack the other because it will be attacked with nuclear weapons itself. That type of deterrence can't and won't work where the other side doesn't care if it dies.

So, we fiddle. And while we do, Iran pursues its nuclear goals. And, once it obtains them, it will be Israel (and maybe us as well) that burns.................

This ought to scare everyone

It sure scares me. There are reports that at least some of the pirates who commandeered that Iranian arms ship have become ill with what seems to be signs of radiation poisoning: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,430681,00.html. If so, that means that the Iranians are apparently in the business of exporting things that could clearly be used in terrorist attacks (likely against us or our allies). If so, the Iranians have gone way over the line from just being a hostile adversary. They are now bordering on something much more ominous and dangerous, not only for us but for the world at large. Maybe someone should pass this information on to Barack Obama, seeing as he wants to sit down and sing kumbaya with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad......

Are they ready?

John McCain? Barack Obama? Sarah Palin? Joe Biden? Paging all comers. As John Bolton notes, the next President, whoever that may be, will HAVE to deal with either a nuclear-armed Iran or preventing the Iranians from becoming a nuclear power: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/09/25/2008-09-25_a_wakeup_call_on_irans_nukes.html. Honestly, I don't know which of the candidates will have what it takes to confront the Mad Mullahs, but certainly, Barack Obama's vow to meet with the leaders of Iran "without preconditions" doesn't exactly reassure me.

I'm pretty much at the point where I'm convinced that even seeing Tel Aviv reduced to a heap of radioactive rubble won't rouse the west out of its slumber with respect to the threat posed by Iran. Hell, a good number of the people here would probably stand up and cheer........

What would they have us do?

An "independent" panel has criticized the Bush Administration for what the panel sees as a lack of effort on the part of the United States to make the country safer from a biological/chemica/nuclear attack: http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20080909/WMD.Report/. In particular, the panel cites to the growing rift between the U.S. and Russia. Well, what exactly SHOULD we do? Would the panel members have us ignore the Russian invasion of Georgia? Should we just look past Russian efforts to aid the Iranians as they attempt to develop nuclear weapons? I understand that international politics sometimes calls for us to deal with those who are not our friends, but that doesn't mean that we have to kowtow to them, either.

Or, does it?

Be nervous

I've blogged previously about Pakistan, and what would happen if Pervez Musharraf were gone. Well, we're going to find out very soon: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,405221,00.html. We know that Musharraf was an ally in name only in the war against Islamic terrorism. That said, whoever replaces him will likely be far worse. Anybody who thinks that a nuclear armed Taliban-style state is a good thing is probably cheering right now.

Well, Hallelujah!

SOMEONE else has noticed that an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) weapon could do far more damage to the United States than even a major nuclear attack on a large U.S. city: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121824192073426161.html?mod=djemEditorialPage. I have to ask; WHY doesn't this scare more people? Why is it so rarely--if ever--discussed?

For my previous post on this subject, which I did about a month ago, go here: http://baldheadedgeek.blogspot.com/2008/07/something-else-to-cause-us-worry.html.

No easy solutions

Pakistan's government is corrupt and has links to worldwide terrorism. Of that there can be no doubt: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/world/asia/30pstan.html?_r=1&oref=slogin. However, what would replace it if it fell? Does anyone want to contemplate the idea of a Taliban-style government with nuclear weapons? How long does anyone think it would take before one of those nukes came into the possession of al Qaeda, or Hamas, or Hezbollah, or any of the other terrorist organizations out there?

We may not like the Pakistani government, but we should be VERY leery of what might take its place...........

If this doesn't scare you, it ought to

Edward Jay Epstein, a nuclear security expert, has analyzed whether Iran is going nuclear, and if so, when. Frighteningly, the answer to those two questions are "Yes", and "Very soon": http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/Nuclearelephant.htm. This isn't just conjecture on his part; he looks at what it takes to go nuclear and how far along the Iranians already are.

I don't think that the world will wake up to this until Tel Aviv is a smoking heap of nuclear rubble, and even then, most people will probably just cheer...........

I hate it when history repeats itself

Forty-six years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Russians are apparently at it again. There are reports that they are considering placing long range bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons in Cuba: http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=2558573&referralPlaylistId=92a703c7546a6f8e671948e4b777bc5d899d57d6&maven_referrer=staf. You have to wonder what the Russians are thinking. From a strategic standpoint, this is completely unnncessary. So, the only practical reason is that it would threaten the United States.

Hmm, President Bush, you looked into Vladimir Putin's eyes and liked what you saw. You still think that that's true?

Something else to cause us worry

With all of the talk about the Iranian missile tests today and yesterday, this Wall Street Journal editorial raises a concern that hadn't even crossed my mind. What if they decide to hit us with an electromagnetic pulse ("EMP") bomb: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121564702233840875.html?mod=djemEditorialPage. All that would take would be to set off a nuclear warhead in the atmosphere, where it could fry ground and satellite-based electronic systems, leaving this country more or less in the dark ages, given our technological dependency. Imagine getting up and having no use of your:
A) Computer
B) Microwave Oven
C) Refrigerator
D) Dishwasher
E) Central Air Unit/Furnace
F) Car
G) Cell Phone
H) Cordless Telephone
I) Stereo
J) Television
K) Clock Radio
L) Most wristwatches
M) Electric Razors
N) Hair Dryers

Obviously, the sophistication of the electronics would be a factor, i.e., the more sophisticated it is, the more likely it would be to be fried by an EMP. Scarily, it doesn't end there, though. You would also have no access to your money because all ATM's would be down. In fact, the entire banking industry would be pretty much toast, given how computer-dependent it is. Want to use that credit card? Not going to be very easy, because the credit card companies are also pretty much dependent on computers. So, you will have no access to money and no way to tide yourself over by the use of credit cards. That still leaves the government, right? Well, ummmm, no it doesn't. Governments at all levels (Federal, State, County, Municipal) also rely on computers, and let's not forget the fun and games the various governmental agencies experienced in Louisiana and Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina when they had a fully functional electronic system.

And, let's say that whoever launched the EMP decided to follow it up with some "targeted" attacks inside this country. Even something as seemingly basic as starting a fire would be a major problem because the fire trucks would all be inoperable, and worse yet, if there was an attack on the water distribution system (again, very easy, given that computers either run or assist in the running of just about everything), there might not even be water flowing to the hydrants..........or to your house. And I'm just discussing things on a micro-level. The effect on the country as a whole would be devastating. Wall Street would take years to recover, if it ever did. Think that the dollar is collapsing now? It would be worth about as much as a sheet of toilet paper if an EMP were set off over the Northeastern U.S. The military would have a miserable time trying to defend the country, given that its airplanes and tanks wouldn't run, and there would be no running and hiding by taking the first flight out because any planes within range of the EMP would be grounded (or worse yet crashed, if they happened to be in the air at the time of the EMP). All of this speculation is if one EMP were set off. If it were two or more, the situation is too scary to contemplate.

Maybe the problem isn't that we are TOO worried. Maybe it's that we're not worried ENOUGH............

Not good at all

The Iranians have just tested a missile which can reach Israel: http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSDAH91544220080709. With the U.S. refusing to greenlight an Israeli raid to take out the Iranian nuclear facilities (for more on that, go here: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1000048.html), it's now only a matter of time before Iran has nuclear weapons as well as the means to deliver them. Once it does, you can say "Shalom" to Israel, a development which the world will greet with either a yawn or a cheer................

United States prepares to surrender to Iran......

..........just as the Iranians ramp up their preparations for an attack on Israel. Good timing!

The U.S. is apparently set to drop a key element of its position with respect to Iran, which is that Iran halt all uranium enrichment, changing its position instead to one that would call for Iran to just keep its enrichment at current levels: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/2242595/America-softens-stance-on-Iran's-nuclear-programme.html. Meanwhile, an American admiral has authored a report in which he concludes that Iran is likely to attack Israel: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/999009.html.

Is this more of the influence of Condhimmileeza Rice? More of the James "F--- the Jews" Baker's influence? Just more of the same out of the dhimi State Department? Yet another sign that the Bush 43 Administration's morphing into the Bush 41 Adminstration is now complete? All of the above? Regardless, one thing is certain, and that is that this is not good at all.............

Iran ascendant

The United States doesn't have the will to do it, and neither does Europe. Israel doesn't have the ability to do it. So, it is all abut inevitable that at some point in the next few years, Iran will join the club of countries who own nuclear arms: http://www.nypost.com/seven/06152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/bombs_awaywhy_the_us_policy_isnt_working_115609.htm. The ramifications of this will be global, as Amir Teheri notes. Iran is already closely allied with Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and a whole list of other anti-American regimes. What will stop Iran from, as Teheri speculates, basing nuclear weapons in Cuba? It's not like we have a JFK in the White House now who will stare down the Iranians, and if it's Obama in the White House, you can be sure that any aggressive Iranian move would not be met with any American resistance whatsoever.

The Holocaust Declaration

Charles Krauthammer writes ominously on Realclearpolitics' website about the impending arrival of Iran to the list nuclear-armed nations: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/deterrence_to_defend_israel.html. It is his suggestion that the United States place Israel under its nuclear umbrella. I don't know if this will be adequate, but it would be a start.........

I guess that this would solve the problem

A Pakistani newspaper editor has advocated that Pakistan use nuclear weapons to "free" Kashmir from Indian control: http://www.thememriblog.org/blog_personal/en/6072.htm. That this would cause a nuclear conflagration which would result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people on both sides of the border, if not millions, seems to concern him not in the least.

Sobering thoughts

By now, everyone has heard about, if not actually read, the news reports that the National Intelligence Estimate says that Iran is apparently not pursuing nuclear weapons technology (rhetorical question #1: When the 2005 NIE said that Iran WAS seeking nuclear weapons, it was a "lie" according to many pundits and members of the MSM. Why is it now the gospel truth?). I'll leave aside for the moment my considerable doubts about this determination (rhetorical question #2: If NIE's early in this decaded said that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was pursuing nuclear weapons technology, and they were wrong, why are they right now?).

With or without nuclear weapons, Iran represents a clear and ever-present danger to American interests in the Gulf: http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110010950. It represents an existential threat to Israel. In fact, if you're Israel, do you REALLY want to trust your survival to the determinations of a bunch of eggheads in Washington, D.C.? I'd bet that the answer to that question is no, or it should be (no), anyway.

Don't worry about Iran!

Iran has every right to seek out nuclear power, weapons, or whatever it wants: http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20071112_Iran_has_a_right_to_seek_nuclear_capability.html. What struck me most about this incredibly naive Op-Ed was the line in the fourth paragraph from the end, where the writer asserts that Iran needs the weapons to protect itself against various, unspecified "external threats". One can only presume that he means the United States and/or Israel.

Of ourse, the only reason that either one of those two countries could even be considered a threat to Iran would be because the Iranians are seeking to construct a nuclear weapon, but that point seems to escape him.

Iran is playing a game we don't understand

Here's a fact for all of you: Persians invented the game of chess. They are true experts in the art of brinksmanship. At the same time, even if we were as good as the Iranians at playing these games, the current regime of Mad Mullahs is not working according to the same script we are: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/11/05/do0503.xml.

Simply put, the Iranian leadership is not in the business of making idle statements or threats. When they say that they want Israel wiped off the map, that's what they mean and what they will try to accomplish. When they say that they want nuclear power, it's because they are going to try and use it for reasons that we don't consider rational, but which they see as perfectly legitimate. We misinterpret them at our own tremendous peril.

If this doesn't scare you, nothing will

Fearmongering? Maybe. The fact of the matter, however, is that the Islamofascists have made no secret of their unending desire to hit the U.S. homeland with a massive terrorist attacks, be it chemical, biological or as this column posits, nuclear: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DouglasMacKinnon/2007/08/15/the_two_things_to_know_before_your_city_is_nuked_by_terrorists.

I have to be honest. I'm not prepared for this eventuality. I don't have stockpiles of food, water or much as I hate to admit that I would need them, weapons. So, I don't know what I would do, though the idea of packing my family off to Canada to live with my sisters and their families is certainly appealing....................

Whither Pakistan?

What has been going on there should concern us all: http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20070723&s=bergen072307. If that country falls into the hands of the Taliban elements in Pakistan, as could very well occur, we would be facing a country with a seventh century mentality and nuclear weapons. You can be sure that if this occurs, the new government will be only too happy to disseminate its nuclear technology to its terrorist buddies.