Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Krauthammer: Making A Decision On Iran
Townhall.com ^ | 09/15/06 | Charles Krauthammer

Posted on 09/15/2006 11:10:51 AM PDT by Froufrou

Edited on 09/15/2006 11:20:12 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

In his televised 9/11 address, President Bush said that we must not ``leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons.'' There's only one such current candidate: Iran.

The next day, he responded thus (as reported by Rich Lowry and Kate O'Beirne of National Review) to a question on Iran: ``It's very important for the American people to see the president try to solve problems diplomatically before resorting to military force.''


(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: bombirannow; bombiransoilwells
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last
To: Froufrou
Why do you name Cheney?

am guessin that V.P. has influence on Pres.; that's all.

41 posted on 09/15/2006 12:34:14 PM PDT by 1234 (WHO is Responsible for ENFORCING IMMIGRATION LAWS?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Constitutions Grandchild
"They'd have to hold a gun to my head to get me to return -- I'd put it off as long as I could."

LOL! Me, too! What a mess this poor old world is in.

Carolyn

42 posted on 09/15/2006 12:46:49 PM PDT by CDHart ("It's too late to work within the system and too early to shoot the b@#$%^&s."--Claire Wolfe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
The Arab Press and MSM (may beleive this was a Hezbollah victory), but the "Arab street" knows that the Lebanese people would prefer not to have any more such victories.

We know this how?

Because Hezbollah has been ejected from Lebanon's government?

Because there have been massive street demonstrations against Hezbollah in Bruit (as there were against Syria two years ago)?

Because we are reading news reports of spitting and cursing villagers refusing Hezbollah aid in rebuilding?

Because the governments of most other Islamic states are issuing daily denunciation of Hezbollah's actions in Lebanon?

Because Lebanese public opinion is forcing Hezbollah to disarm?

No one likes to be on the receiving end of an fective air campaign against their country's basic infrastructure, or to be even temporary refuges forced from their homes.

But that's not the same as blaming Hezbollah for their situation.

For example a poll taken last week shows that the Lebanese population is split almost evenly of the question of whether Hezbollah should be disarmed – about the same as before the war – and The UN secretary-general was jeered in a Shiite suburb of Beirut last week – a pretty good measure of Shiite Lebanon's endorsement of UN hopes of disarming Hezbollah.

According to every report I've read – including those in the Israeli press - the fact that Hezbollah after weeks of punishing attacks of Israel was still launching missiles for as little a two miles north of the border increased their creditability on “The Arab Street” because they were absorbing punishing attacks but continued to respond with attacks of this their own.

You can't apply “western” standards when attempting to predict or understand the effects such measures upon "honor societies" - in this case it appears that the greater the damage inflicted by Israel on Lebanon, the greater the “honor” of the Hezbollah “resistance” and the civilian “martyrs” who died in Israeli attacks.

43 posted on 09/15/2006 12:54:18 PM PDT by M. Dodge Thomas (More of the same, only with more zeros at the end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Check_Your_Premises
Yer # 11 - couldn't have said it better myself, and it'll happen within a year!

We'd better get some refineries too, since we ain't built any here since 1976.............FRegards

44 posted on 09/15/2006 1:19:31 PM PDT by gonzo (.........Good grief!...I'm as confused as a baby in a topless club!.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gonzo

Actually I heard Iran has almost zilch in refining capabilities.


45 posted on 09/15/2006 1:23:57 PM PDT by Check_Your_Premises (Ceterum censeo <Islamofascism> esse delendam -Huerro the Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: M. Dodge Thomas

"so we would be looking at an open-ended occupation of Iran"

Not of Iran, just their oil fields. THat is my WHOLE point. We can forgo a messy occupation and nation building type venture. We cut off their funds and destroy their nuke capabilities. They will no longer have funds to support terrorism. They will no longer have a military to suppress the populace.

True they would be more mad at us than the mullahs, but who cares?

CYP


46 posted on 09/15/2006 1:28:24 PM PDT by Check_Your_Premises (Ceterum censeo <Islamofascism> esse delendam -Huerro the Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou
There are many economic factors that are not being taken into account. Sure the West is running out of oil, cheap oil. At $100 a barrel, we have reserves that dwarf the demand, so a percipitous climb in oil prices would be very temporary, and it would gradually start coming down again. The question really is: "Just how dangerous are the Mad Mullahs of Iran?" If they are really dangerous, then we have the choice of the economic damgage of high oil prices, or of flattened major cities? I think the rapid pace of events will decide our course for us, and it won't be surrender.
47 posted on 09/15/2006 1:33:52 PM PDT by Richard Axtell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55

Read the whole thing -- it's even-handed.


48 posted on 09/15/2006 1:38:16 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Richard Axtell

Agreed. All the anti-Bush sentiments the Libbies have harbored and fed ad nauseum will make things even worse. I hope their stubborn stupidity won't drag us down any further.


49 posted on 09/15/2006 1:45:28 PM PDT by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

Does the recent price drop in gasoline have anything to do with our potential "energy independence"? We have 5 ethanol plant under construction in Ohio. (We can debate the efficency of products later.) But, with that and the recent oil find in the Gulf of Mexico, would cheaper product make it less attractive to invest in alternative fuels or new oil fields?

Iran? I'm still concerned about Russia!! Putin is doing a good job of creating a hedgemony by using Iran.


50 posted on 09/15/2006 1:46:03 PM PDT by griswold3 (Ken Blackwell, Ohio Governor in 2006- No!! You cannot have my governor in 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

And let's not forget China. I saw elsewhere that they're about to colonize part of Africa!


51 posted on 09/15/2006 1:48:05 PM PDT by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

52 posted on 09/15/2006 1:54:37 PM PDT by Gritty (If you want to have good relations with the Iranian people you should bow and surrender-A'd'jad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gritty

Hahahaha, looks like an MC Escher drawing!!!


53 posted on 09/15/2006 1:55:43 PM PDT by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Check_Your_Premises

I like your ideas.
Imagine , though , the world reaction to us following your plan . " USA invades to capture oil fields " !


54 posted on 09/15/2006 1:56:25 PM PDT by sonic109
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Check_Your_Premises
We could probably shoot across the coast; south east from Iraq, south west from Afghanistan, and link up somewhere in the middle.

With what? In case you hadn't noticed a huge chunk of our military is occupied right now.

The mullahs would be cut-off and their government would collapse. No more petro-dollars funding their mad dreams. The oil market would suffer a serious jolt, but would be back to normal in no time.

Wasn't that what was supposed to happen in Iraq?

55 posted on 09/15/2006 1:59:15 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All
Our wind bag politicians need tostop playing games and get on this and get very blunt about this with the rest of the world.Something MUST be done about Iran nukes and done soon. Plain talk is needed . The worlds populations need to be told what the consequences will be if Iran gets nukes. Sides must be taken and action to follow swiftly and deadly.
56 posted on 09/15/2006 2:00:51 PM PDT by sonic109
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Check_Your_Premises

I like the plan however, a couple of things might mess this up.

Iran using nukes to stop us or a major power(s) that decide to get involved. Otherwise, it might just work!


57 posted on 09/15/2006 2:01:43 PM PDT by wolfcreek (You can spit in our tacos and you can rape our dogs but, you can't take away our freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Life is going to get very uncomfortable.

It already is, and it won't be the first time. My dad for example lived through the Depression and two wars. What was your point?

I suppose you'll be lining up to say it's Bush's fault.

Why should I do that? We elect Presidents, not gods. All we can ask of a President is that he act according to his oath of office. President George W. Bush has done that in spades.
58 posted on 09/15/2006 2:17:48 PM PDT by kenavi (Save romance. Stop teen sex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou
but I say we've got to limit consumption

You don't have to say it, people do it as prices rise.

If someone wants to drive a gas guzzler, let him. That will give the oil companies more money to explore for and develop oil or other energy sources. As for me, I am so tight that my biggest need for oil is to lubricate myself so I don't squeak when I walk.
59 posted on 09/15/2006 2:23:26 PM PDT by kenavi (Save romance. Stop teen sex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

"Wasn't that what was supposed to happen in Iraq?"

Well not exactly. We literally conquered the ENTIRE country not JUST THE OILFIELDS.

We actually hunted down and captured the leadership, instead of just cutting off their funding and destroying their military power.

We actually attempted to govern and enable democratic elections rather then simply weakening the government and allowing nature to take it's course.

COMPLETELY DIFFERENT


60 posted on 09/15/2006 2:23:52 PM PDT by Check_Your_Premises (Ceterum censeo <Islamofascism> esse delendam -Huerro the Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson