Posted on 04/03/2015 11:24:30 PM PDT by WilliamIII
The logical flaw in the indictment of a looming “very bad” nuclear deal with Iran that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered before Congress this month was his claim that we could secure a “good deal” by calling Iran’s bluff and imposing tougher sanctions. The Iranian regime that Netanyahu described so vividly — violent, rapacious, devious and redolent with hatred for Israel and the United States — is bound to continue its quest for nuclear weapons by refusing any “good deal” or by cheating.
This gives force to the Obama administration’s taunting rejoinder: What is Netanyahu’s alternative? War? But the administration’s position also contains a glaring contradiction. National security adviser Susan Rice declared at an American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference before Netanyahu’s speech that “a bad deal is worse than no deal.” So if Iran will accept only a “bad deal,” what is President Obama’s alternative? War?
Obama’s stance implies that we have no choice but to accept Iran’s best offer — whatever is, to use Rice’s term, “achievable” — because the alternative is unthinkable.
But should it be? What if force is the only way to block Iran from gaining nuclear weapons? That, in fact, is probably the reality.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I think the catastrophic EMP theory has pretty much been debunked.
They would be doing us a favor, especially if they nuked DC.
Unfortunately, they’ll probably strike someplace where real Americans live.
Hadn’t heard that. Even if they could just do it over the north or south east would be very bad.
The logical flaw in Joshua’s piece is the fact Joshua is not very bright.
How do you deal with a violent, rapacious, devious and redolent with hatred for Israel and the United States type Bully?
Deny said Bully the resources to seek and develop a Nuke.
Hope hard line Islamist give up their dream of World dominance?
Support reasonable Persians in their quest for a normal government (too bad Barky stepped on his D and missed his previous opportunity)
Since we have a lot of nukes, and they want nukes, we should give them a few... delivery methods options: air delivered via plane, missile delivered, or sea launch delivery.
“How do you deal with a violent, rapacious, devious and redolent with hatred for Israel and the United States type Bully?”
How do you deal with a violent, rapacious, devious, and redolent country bend on human annihilation to fulfill a religious belief?
I’ve studied the EMP issue in great detail, and I think the bottom line is that the effect is real, the magnitude is overstated, and to produce Forstchen/Gingrich-novel level damage would require hundreds of weapons with synchronized delivery, impossible for a goat-molesting state.
..when it’s not anything more than an agreement to continue talks...
Barry “Waterboy” 0bama is strutting his endzone dance and spiking the football; meanwhile the two teams are leaving their locker rooms to start pre game warmups.
Don’t get me wrong - I think repeating “Death to America” plus having a uranium enrichment program is more than enough cause to declare war on Iran, and to use nukes ourselves to destroy their program if necessary.
I just don’t think whatever damage they could do can “threaten our survival”.
The US abandons Iraq and Israel, shuns the new Egyptian government, and cuddles up to Iran.
Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Turkey, the UAE and Pakistan therefore perceive Iran to be more of a threat, and their interests now align with those of Israel.
Thus the Palestinian issue moves to the back of the bus.
They all seem to have concluded that they’re on their own now, as Obama cannot be trusted to combat Iran’s hegemony in the region.
As a result we now have a new dynamic in the region, more specifically a new military coalition, seemingly ready to oppose Iran.
In attempting to isolate Israel, Obama has inadvertently succeeded in further isolating Iran.
Together, the military might of the “orphan coalition”, exceeds somewhat that of Iran, whose military is vastly overrated. Israel alone could set back Iran’s nuclear program for decades. And if they don’t help, at least the Arab coalition nations will now sit back and allow it to happen. This is the new paradigm that has evolved in a matter of weeks.
Turkey and others are now making nice to Israel, and Obama just ended the military implements freeze with Egypt. Is the green light being given to Bibi?
We’re now in an entirely new world, people.
We've had some bad outages in the NE and I believe that area is susceptible to attack or natural disaster. A hit to the NE corridor from DC to Boston would kill a lot of people
I've always thought that all they would have to do is fly nukes in on private or commercial planes, on commercial ships or across the wide open southern border.
The mad mullahs have to know that they need to hit us while zero is still in office. He'll probably send Lurch over to ask what we did to make them mad and apologize.
[and 85-90% of the world's Muslims are Sunni, IOW, Shiites kill twice as many per capita]
Thanks WilliamIII.
Look at it this way. If your enemy was massing hundreds of thousands of troops on your border, would your country view that as a provocation? Or would your country enter into a non aggression treaty which would allow the troops to remain on the border.
Building ICBM deliverable nuclear weapons is the same as massing troops on the border. Does not at all matter who did what first.
And what becomes of Iraq? And how do we also retain enough forces to deter Russia in Europe.
Obama has gotten us into a fine set of messes. I fear that World War is coming--but will it break out before Obama leaves office?
I wouldnt thank him...he thinks Iran has a right to nuclear power...he’s concern trolling.
thanks Crim!
Now we have Obama/Chamberlain give us peace on our time.
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.