Posted on 09/02/2006 8:31:20 AM PDT by GMMAC
We should nuke Iran
Toronto Sun
Saturday, September 2, 2006
By MICHAEL COREN
It is surely obvious now to anybody with even a basic understanding of history, politics and the nature of fascism that something revolutionary has to be done within months -- if not weeks -- if we are to preserve world peace.
Put boldly and simply, we have to drop a nuclear bomb on Iran.
Not, of course, the unleashing of full-scale thermo-nuclear war on the Persian people, but a limited and tactical use of nuclear weapons to destroy Iran's military facilities and its potential nuclear arsenal. It is, sadly, the only response that this repugnant and acutely dangerous political entity will understand.
The tragedy is that innocent people will die. But not many. Iran's missiles and rockets of mass destruction are guarded and maintained by men with the highest of security clearance and thus supportive of the Tehran regime. They are dedicated to war and, thus, will die in war.
Frankly, it would be churlish of the civilized world to deny martyrdom to those who seem so intent on its pursuance. Most important, a limited nuclear attack on Iran will save thousands if not millions of lives.
The spasm of reaction from many will be that this is barbaric and unacceptable. Yet a better response would be to ask if there is any sensible alternative.
Diplomacy, kindness and compromise have failed and the Iranian leadership is still obsessed with all-out war against anybody it considers an enemy.
Its motives are beyond question, its capability equally so. It is spending billions of dollars on a whole range of anti-ship, anti-aircraft and anti-personnel missiles, rockets and ballistic weapons:
The Shahab 3ER missile, with a range of more than 2,000 km, and the BM25 and accompanying launchers, which are so powerful that they can hit targets in Europe. Raad missiles with a range of 350km. The Misaq anti-aircraft missile, which can be fired from the shoulder. The Fajar 3 radar-evading missile and the Ajdar underwater missile, which travels at an extraordinarily high speed and is almost impossible to intercept. The Zaltal and the Fatah 110 rocket, the Scud B and Scud C and the BM25 with a range of 3,500 kms.
Iran is also developing enormous propellant ballistic missiles and began a space program almost a decade ago that will enable it to bomb the United States. It is also assumed in intelligence circles that Tehran has Russian Kh55 cruise missiles stolen from Ukraine which are now being copied in large numbers by Iranian scientists.
Comparisons to the Nazis in the 1930s are unfair -- to the Nazis. Hitler had the French army, the largest in Europe, on his border and millions of Soviet infantry just a few hours march away. Iran has no aggressive enemies in the region.
Its fanatical leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, controls a brutal police state, finances international terror and provokes bloody wars in foreign countries. It is unimaginably wealthy because of its oil revenues and is committed, in its leader's words, to "rolling back 300 years of Western ascendancy" and wiping another nation, Israel, from the face of the earth.
A conventional attack would be insufficient because Iran and its allies seem only to listen to power and threat. Better limited pain now than universal suffering in five years.
The usual suspects will complain. The post-Christian churches, the Marxists, the fellow travelers and fifth columnists. But then, the same sort of people moaned and condemned in 1938. They were clearly wrong then.
They would be just as wrong now.
This form the Toronto Sun ???? Will wonders never cease.
Not just Iran.
They can't move fast enough. Our military can burn their infrastructure to the ground the same day that they begin to move.
Put the fear of God into 'em. Show them that our God is more powerful than their god. Sounds primitive but it worked with Japan and it would work again.
hmmm reminds me of an old classic....
bomb, bomb, bomb
bomb, bomb Iran.
I have no problem with this.
Wrong...nukes are a primary weapon for Imanutjob and if he wants them then we should have no reservations about showing him just what they can do.
Countries with Nuclear Weapons Capability
Acknowledged: Britain, China, France, India, Pakistan, Russia, United States
Unacknowledged: Israel Seeking: North Korea,1 Iran2
Abandoned: South Africa—Constructed but then voluntarily dismantled six uranium bombs. Belarus, Kazakhstan, Ukraine—When Soviet Union broke up, these former states possessed nuclear warheads that they have since given up.
I agree with the total destruction of their plant and infrastructure, the sooner the better, so they don't scatter it around a la WMD in Iraq.
But it is not necessary to use nukes to do this, just a whole lot of conventional ordnance, such as daisy-cutters and JDAMS.
Why the finnickiness? Nukes are a threshold, largely psychological, that we don't want to ANYONE to cross. Dresden showed how conventional ordnance can accomplish the same thing.
Plus, we want to keep the oil spoils clean once we own Iran.
Talk about the energy crisis being over! Ten cent a gallon gasoline again. And the US as a member of OPEC.
Now you're talking.
Canada has Nukes? Guess you guys have been doing something with the nuclear waste from the Candu(sp?) reactors;)
For the record, I think this may be the Free Worlds only option. Iran has to be stopped, and very soon!!!
Thank you James Earl Carter, for letting Iran go down this path, now 25 years later, we have to clean up your mess!!!
Let the games begin !!
No, we shouldn't. If we were inclined to kill some Iranians, we need to go after Mr. Iwannajihad and his cohorts. Most other Iranians are not complicit in his plans and machinations, so why punish them for the actions of their leaders?
I love words like Dasiy-cutter and Thermobaric, almost as much as the smell of Napalm in the morning.
Let's assess, fairly, to all whom blame is due: Carter, Bush I, Clinton, and thus far, Bush II. Same goes for North Korea.
I say take out Iran's nuclear capability now. There is a dynamics that the UN does not want the world to understand. Iran is using the tactic of spreading their resources out a wide as possible and putting what they have in hardened bunkers near population centers. Getting at these bunkers may require atomic bunker busters; hardly something you would want to set off in a population center. If they were to start producing nukes, guess where they would be? We need to derail their production operation by hitting the processing plants and the material already produced. Such would put a huge economic dent in the production operation. The longer we put off this necessary the harder it gets. Like the doctor said, "If we don't cut off the fingernail now, it will be the arm later."
This is the same logic that is losing in Iraq. Don't we ever learn! In WWII, many innocents died because of their leaders; and in Iran, they elected this animal. We need to not worry about those very civilians that empowered this animal and worry about the rest of us who love peace and a world free of a nuclear Iran.
I agree with this assessment. Sooner or later this will be required. If we act soon it will just be their nuclear and military sites. If we wait, it will be Tehran too.
Wow! In Canadian MSM no less!
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.