Yet a nuclear Iran is only a small element of the real threat. Once equipped with nuclear bomb capabilities, Iran will probably first & foremost establish a means to duplicate their bomb & make many, many bombs. And that is the “real” problem. Once Iran has more than one bomb, you can bet the bank they will distribute those “excess” bombs to every nut job terrorist who is seeking to subjugate the rest of the world to their despotic vision of a seventh century world run by Islam & its extremist Imams.

So in a way the appeasers are right. Iran with a bomb could be dealt with, “if” they were not over the top extremists. But Iran’s leaders are over the top extremists & they are in bed with the world’s over the top extremists who want Islamic rule over the world perhaps even more than Iran does. This is why the appeasers are dead wrong. They see Iran as a single compartmented issue. They do not see the really big picture of perhaps dozens of extremist terrorists possessing bombs & what devastation these extremists could wrought on the whole world.

This is why Iran should be denied the bomb & this is why Israel wants the world to support & agree with them that mankind must do all it can to stop such an eventuality. Ironically, Israel’s desire to stop Iran is actually an act to protect the rest of the world!

Now, Hussein Oh-Banana and EU-Biden along with their other EU buddies will do their best to re-install EU-mullah Khatami(or someone like him with EU-ties) as “president” of Islamic Republic of Turds of Tehran in the May 2009 presidential ‘elections’ there.
Believe me they are already working on that.

If a Khatami or a ‘Khatamite’ gets back in there in June 2009, all bets are off: no bombing, no nothing, ‘Grand bargain’ galore, i.e. no regime change. The new Prez in Iran, be it Khatami or another EU-stooge, will immidiately declare a multi-year ‘freeze’ on all nuke activities, and That will be that. The rest will be dealings and wheelings with the EU-mullahs by Obama/Biden team. And the regime will get a long long long lease on life. Problem solved!

If –on the other hand– Nejad(who is running again) or another ‘fundamentalist’(Russian faction within the regime) gets re-elected there n June, we may just see bombings yet, but not necessarily ‘regime change’.

Either way, the chances of any ’steam rising’ from within Iran from the numbed Iranian populace against the regime are equal to chance of a snowball in hell.

You see the city-dweller Iranian are too busy re-doing their noses and chins by plastic surgery, and dancing in their night parties in major cities, in their Caspian sea villas with their opium and sex orgies, and travelling to Dubai for fun to care much about ‘regime change’. The regime knows it too and allows the decadence to go on since it is in its advantage for the masses to be a-political.

So sorry to say that any short to intermediate range change of regime in Iran will have to be from the outside. Just like in 1953, except that in 1953 we did the wrong thing and did the wrong thing real well!
But now that we have to do the right thing, we slumber and appease the mullahs, instead.
Shame on Bush for being a push-over on Iran, and even more shame on Condi-mullah appeaser-Rice for that.
Condi deserves a few “shoes” to be thrown at her face for that! But somehow Bush got the dirty end of that stick(as usual.)

Watch it unfold- “when you can make a deal with them, why change them?” Say Hussein Obama and Euro-Biden.

Obviously Hussein Obama’s “Change” did not extend to or encompass regimes like Iran’s.

The tough-talking heavyweight sits in his corner, pounding his gloves, rarin’ to go. Then the bell rings, the big bruiser gets up, rushes forward – and pees in his pants.

Russia stalled the Bushehr nuclear plant as long as it could, but now with its completion Russia looks forward to stronger commercial relations with Iran, especially as Russia seriously considers joining OPEC.

Swiss utility companies buy Iranian natural gas to sell to its customers in northern Italy.

None of this would be possible if Iran’s present form of governance was accurately described in Germany, Russia, Italy or Switzerland. So long as the ‘nature’ and ‘character’ of Iran’s governance is innaccurately described in propagandistic and particularistic rhetoric, the world merely hears the boy falsly crying “Wolf” and will not join the fight to deny dual-capability nuclear power to Iran.

For at least two years we have made a weak case against Iran’s governance. Instead of correctly arguing about the ‘character’ of the theocracy in Iran, we have allowed the debate to concentrate on geo-political issues, which always reduce the argument to calls for “stability,” the favorite word of thugs, theocrats, and the Nobel Prize Committee.

In Ambassador Bolton’s words, Iran is already a nuclear state. Dual-capability is now only a year away, IF that is Iran’s intent.

Mr. Obama’s intent is still a mystery. The American neo-cons have all but destroyed the most accurate and strongest arguement available against Iran’s theofascism, so Mr. Obama’s eventual policy to Iran could very easily attempt to adopt George Kennan’s “containment” recommendation for US policy against the Soviet Union.

Hitler’s and Komeini’s form of governance, in Hitler’s actual words, is a “philosophy of life.” As Dr. Ledeen points out, the nihilsm of Nazism and Khomeinism actually make them a ‘philosophy of death.’ Our brightest intellectuals have failed abysmally over the past two years to make Churchill’s warnings a part of the current debate. Churchill didn’t give a fig about the geo-politics of Nazism, or about ‘realist’ versus ‘idealist’ onanism in the halls of academia and government. What Churchill warned against was the ‘nature,’ the ‘character’ of the governing philosophy. Every neo-con argument against Iran for the past two years has mis-identified the threat by the unfathomable use of anti-intellectual propaganda. If we had simply made an accurate argument, Mr. Obama’s ultimate Iran policy would reflect the strongest, clearest, and most Churchillian thinking.

No one is brighter than the neo-cons, and no one is as unintentionally self-defeating. Iran is another neo-con opportunity missed.

Therefore, in the meantime, as there is obviously no “nuclear umbrella” policy in place already, does Iran henceforth have carte blanche until such time as Mr. Obama decides to make this declaration?

Obama seems already to have backstabbed Israel, and he merely holds the Office of the President-Elect. Imagine the damage he can do after January 20.