Posted on 01/05/2006 12:09:34 PM PST by EternalHope
IRAN: Bad Moon Rising (Vanity)
All living former Secretaries of State and Secretaries of Defense have been summoned to a meeting tomorrow (Friday, January 6, 2006). To the best of my knowledge this has never been done before.
Our current Secretary of State is on a whirlwind tour of our allies, but will (presumably) be back in time for this meeting.
Why? Why NOW? Is something up?
These facts are not in dispute:
1. The current leadership in Iran is religiously determined to exterminate Israel, and to spread Islam to all the world. They have expressly stated that Allah would be please if Israel were nuked, even if every Muslim capital were destroyed in retaliation. They are psychopathic.
2. We must take action VERY soon or Iran will have nukes.
3. Iran already has the almost certain ability to retaliate against the U.S., using unconventional weapons of mass destruction. (I also thought Saddam would retaliate against us. I hope I'm wrong about this too.)
1+2+3=Bad Moon Rising. Trouble on the Way.
The Iranian people do not support their insane government. But they have not been able to overthrow that government, and there is almost no chance that they will be able to do so in time.
The stakes could not be higher. An attack on Iran could throw the whole world into turmoil. No one can be sure how something like this will turn out. It could even be the trigger that starts a generalized war between Islam and those parts of the rest of the world that still have the will to fight.
And yet, if the U.S. does not eliminate the Iranian threat, Israel will HAVE to. It is a clear matter of national survival for them.
An attack by Israel is quite likely to spark general war in the middle east. Although it is fraught with peril, the less risky course is for the U.S. to do the job, not Israel.
The Democrats know action cannot be delayed much longer. And they are intensely opposed. Is it a coincidence that, right NOW, an all out attempt is being made by the media and the Democrat party to destroy the President and cripple our ability to fight the war on terror?
I believe President Bush knows all of this, and has the courage to do what is right in spite of the political consequences.
Side Note #1: The Howard Dean/Nancy Pelosi Democrats and their allies in the MSM and academia are certain to go even more berserk. I'm not sure we have the national unity we will need to overcome their intense hysteria. But if Iran responds with an attack on the U.S. with WMD's, the nation may come together in spite of the Democrats' screams that it's all Bush's fault.
Side Note #2: A major Muslim feast associated with the end of the Hajj is next week. The annual Hajj pilgrimage climaxes on Monday with the Eid al-Adha, a four-day feast. At least 2.5 million pilgrims are expected to be in Mecca.
An attack on Iran while millions of Muslims are on pilgrimage in Saudia Arabia could easily result in such unstable conditions in Saudia Arabia that the kingdom would fall. Hence I do not expect to see anything until the annual pilgrimage is over and the crowds have left Saudi Arabia.
Time is running out. We will not do anything in the next few days. We have, perhaps, a month. Perhaps less.
The probelm though is that many people are going to be skeptical about Iran's capabilities in light of the stories & intelligence which were reported about Iraq which turned out to be erroneous from the recent past.
Just another thought to add to all the mayhem in the Middle East, with Ariel Sharon being in the condition he is, I wonder how that will add or detract (if you will) to this terrible situation?
Bible prophecies coming true?
"All living former Secretaries of State and Secretaries of Defense have been summoned to a meeting tomorrow (Friday, January 6, 2006). To the best of my knowledge this has never been done before."
Where did you get the above information, please?
If your information is correct, how do you know this meeting is not about something else, like Sharon's illness, for example?
Thanks.
We probably think an Israeli attack with some covert US help will not lead to an Iranian counterattack. I think we may be wrong there.
We may see an Iranian counter attack into Iraq, which would leave us no choice but for a defensive war to take out the Iranian regime. Unfortunately, Iran will probably launch covert terror in Iraq, Israel and the USA.
I'd rather see us take that last bridge and finish the Iranian threat on the ground, but I doubt we are planning that.
Within the EU and China they are getting used to the idea of a nuke Iran and trying to see what might be in it for them. Everyone knows that diplomacy and sanctions are hopeless, but short of a tactical nuclear strike on Iran or a extended conventional air war, there are no other realistic options. They don't have the stomach for war unless there as a direct of war on them. There is a wild card with the Arabs, however, who fear Persian domination.
The Russians and Paki's need to be brought to heel if containment is to work.
The meeting was called by President Bush to discuss Iraq. There isn't going to be anything serious discussed with Mcnamarra there. But the president is trying to build consensus for Iraq and by extension for the coming Iranian showdown.
I hadn't thought of this scenario, but it sounds plausible.
96 dead ones were invited too, but so far none have RSVP'd.
"...There's a Bad Fool on the Rise!"
Interesting thoughts there. All I can say is that Iran seems to be coming to a head - this year, I'd say. Maybe soon.
Saw somewhere that Israel took possession of 500 bunker buster bombs that we sold them a while back and they have taken delivery of some heavily modified F-16's with increased on-board fuel capacity in addition to drop-tanks. They can easily fly to Iran and return without refueling.
Many in Iran welcomed the Ayatollah Koumeini and the overthrow of the Shah. Do these same people now advocate the overthrow of the present regime? What percentage of Iranians would welcome the overthrow of the present regime? What percentage would welcome it but would remain Muslim if given a real choice of religions? What percentage would be open to conversion to Christianity? To Zoroastrianism?
Is the situation similar to Oliver Cromwell's insane regime in 17th century Britain? Many welcomed the establishment of puritanism, but, after a few years of his murderous regime, were eager for the restoration of the monarchy, the return of Charles II, and the condemnation--for many, including me, the permanent condemnation--of puritanism.
I still condemn fundamentalist puritanism in its various forms, including the insane and murderous Islamic fundamentalism and the equally insane, if less murderous, neo-puritanism of the Western Left, which finds so much in common with Islamic fundamentalism and the other various versions of puritannical extremism.
How many in Iran share my disgust with insane, murderous, puritannical, and un-Godly(!) extremism and would be willing to put an end to it once and for all?
The percentage of the population is important, but, that aside, such people will find loyal allies, throughtout the world and, of considerable importance, throughout the United States.
Land access from the east, west, sea and air give us the needed advantages but I would still like to see the Mullahs toppled peacefully from within by the young Iranians who like western culture. Time available for the peaceful solution is growing shorter each day.
I don't believe that we will settle for only bombing Iran's suspected weapons development sites. If we take any military action at all, then it's going to involve both taking out the weapons sites and bombing all conceivable regime targets.
I don't think we're going to take any military action that has a result of leaving the Iranian regime in power.
The Dems will attack our administration from the inside while Iran and Syria and the Palestinians will continue to attack our troops on the ground. Somewhere in this mess, the Dems will find an angle to call again for impeachment; the MSM will continue to smear the Republicans with Abramoff, DeLay, Libby etc. as a completely corrupt party; the UN will denounce the US. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton and Al, Hillary, and Murtha will call for Bush to resign. We will lose control in the House and Senate in 2006. HRC will become our next president on a "Let's focus on our domestic problems" woman-targeted campaign. Her VP will be John McCain.
The last sentence is the only one I'm kidding about. But of course this is mere speculation that won't come to pass.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.