Former Secretary of Defense William Perry predicts that a nuclear Iran will challenge the incoming Obama administration. The most difficult things about such a challenge would be that: 1) “Israel will not sit by idle while Iran takes the final steps toward becoming a nuclear power”; 2) Perry isn’t sure diplomacy will work any more — “less confident about stopping Iran’s ambitions”.
“It seems clear that Israel will not sit by idle while Iran takes the final steps toward becoming a nuclear power,” Perry told a conference on foreign policy challenges facing the incoming Obama administration. The former Clinton administration defense secretary held out hope that more vigorous U.S. and international diplomacy could reverse North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. But he was less confident about stopping Iran’s ambitions.
“President Obama will almost certainly face a serious crisis with Iran,” Perry said. “Indeed, I believe the crisis point will be reached in his first year in office. So on the nuclear front, President Obama will face a daunting set of problems, none of which can be solved unilaterally.”
Iran denies that its nuclear program is intended to build weapons. The Bush administration, while dismissing Iran’s claims of pursuing only peaceful uses of nuclear power, declined to negotiate directly with Iran.
Obama has said he favors “tough and direct diplomacy with Iran without preconditions,” and that his administration, working with allies, will seek a comprehensive settlement with Iran to end its nuclear ambitions.
Perry clearly fears that the Sunni Arabs would react to a nuclear Iran by building nukes of their own. He said, “if North Korea and Iran cannot be contained, we face the real danger of a cascade of proliferation” of nuclear armed-states, he said. “Indeed, I believe that today we are clearly at the tipping point of nuclear proliferation. And if the world does tip, it will be irreversible and dangerous beyond the imagination of most people.”
Whether BHO can handle the world any better than he did in Chicago remains to be seen. But even if the new President were superbly competent the world may now be in an unmanageable condition. Too many powerful trends are on the loose with too little energy to oppose them to recreate any status quo ante. The question now is whether enough energy and leadership remains to ride the storms out to a relatively stable outcome.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
74 Comments
1. Willie G:It would seem that the former Secretary has his doubts about the capabilities of “The One” PBUH.
We are most assuredly screwed….
Jan 9, 2009 - 1:31 pm 2. whiskey:Obama, like most/all Affirmative Action candidates, is incompetent. Besides, as a man born and raised a Muslim, he welcomes Muslim nuclear proliferation.
Obama’s end game, let’s be honest, is the nuclear annihilation of US cities to enable him to demand a surrender to Sharia.
He and his team of hard-left Gentry WANT this. Like a junkie craving a fix. So they can complete their total rule under the cover of a surrender to Islam.
What Obama does not realize is that his disaster of a Presidency will create in this large, and multi-polar nation, a huge fight politically and economically and socially to overthrow the Gentry.
After all, every scholar defines a pre-Revolutionary state as one where good times and rising expectations are followed by a huge decline in income and social status. What will happen with a nuclear Iran empowered to nuke NYC?
My answer, the rapid impeachment and removal of Obama and the destruction of the Gentry in pure survival mode.
The Gentry has assumed that the US is indestructible and lacks any real threat. A nuclear Iran on the Affirmative Action, Muslim-raised Obama’s watch is proof positive that the Gentry cannot be trusted in anything, and they will be removed in one form or another. There are too many power centers in a huge nation for it to be otherwise.
Jan 9, 2009 - 1:36 pm 3. Annoy Mouse:It seems clear to me that if the majority of US citizens supported President Bush we’d not be in such a difficult situation. The constant vilifying of the president has only managed to weaken our republic and embolden the enemies of freedom.
This debacle I wholly lay at the feet of our anti-American politicians themselves, their counterparts in intelligence and state, and finally, the fourth column of mainstream media. The peoples will are clearly being abrogated here. Furthermore, I believe that the president’s approval ratings are misplaced by the above actors… I had issues with Reagan once upon a time, not that he did me wrong in any manner, but that I was tired of hearing rants against him by political pundits and the MSM. I resented him because I thought he was not being sensitive enough and he was bring the maelstrom down on himself, but now, I realize that we are in an all consuming propaganda war (look at the ME) and all is fair in this arena. I now am perfectly comfortable being called a racist and a baby killer. It is just part of being decent in this upside down world.
There was a time when decent people left their disputes at the shores of America and didn’t let provincial disputes sully our national purpose abroad. Those days are clearly gone. I wonder if now we can really pull back from the brink, somehow, short of global war; I doubt it.
Jan 9, 2009 - 1:36 pm 4. Eggplant:Annoy Mouse asked:
“I wonder if now we can really pull back from the brink, somehow, short of global war; I doubt it.”
We’re hosed. This is a repeat of the 1930s. Within a decade there will be a major world war and it will be fought with nukes against civilian populations.
At least we won’t have to worry about Global Warming.
Jan 9, 2009 - 1:44 pm 5. Contrarian:Eggplant,
I’m interested in how you see this scenario developing. Who will be fighting who? There are not very many countries that have the ability to project military force much beyond their own borders. A lot of wannabes, but very few serious contenders. A war fought strictly with nukes will not be a “world war” in the WWII sense. No massive armies conquering other countries. So who will fight this war and for what reasons?
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:03 pm 6. mohammed:Delusions, Delusions, Delusional. Barrack Hussein Obama has so far proved that he is not as leftist as you want to paint him. Why would Iran nuke Israel? When it knows that it will be nuked itself? Iran is no Iraq and they actually have weapons. So if you think attacking it will be a cup of tea. God help you. Your military industrial complex will keep lining their pockets with your taxes, while your soldiers keep dying.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:09 pm 7. Staring In Disbelief:Whiskey: Dude, you are off the deep end on Obama and the Muslim thing. Obama wants American cities in ashes?!?! Where do you think all his looney-left supporters LIVE for cripes sakes? Vaporize their precious opera’s and Starbucks and marxist bookstores while leaving rural, Red State, small town, backbone of the armed forces America untouched. You’re the one whose touched. Whose gonna impeach Obama? The Republicans couldn’t do it to Clinton when they had him red-handed and a strong congressional majority, now they’re gonna do it with overwhelming numbers behind Red Nancy and Comrade Reid? Stop drinking in the afternoon.
Annoy Mouse is right on the money: Having destroyed the one @#$damn thing GWB did half right (war in Afghanistan & Iraq) by their constant undermining of his power internationally, the left are now holding the tiger’s tail with Iran. They’re not going to be able to blame Bush for this (like they will for the economy). Oh, they’ll try like hell but there is just too much easily citeable evidence for it to stick. Oh no, this one they own hook, ine & stinker. Enjoy.
Also, I am not quite so apocalyptic on the proliferation front. For one thing, it is one hell of a hard and expensive gig to build a nuclear arsenal, and vastly cheaper to be a treaty signatory under the US umbrella. Unless your one of a shrinking number of country’s that want to get on our bad side (Iran is the last big rogue state with a serious shot at causing making trouble, as I think the Norks are more creepy comical than dangerous), the case for nukes is getting thinner, not stronger.
Let’s give the Big O a chance. My sense is we won’t have to wait long to see what Hope and Change looks like with Iran.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:14 pm 8. Staring In Disbelief:Mohamed: You’re the deluded one if you think we couldn’t roll Iran like a Persian rug. Iran’s armed forces are less impressive than Iraq’s were in 1990 when we turned them into the biggest Scrap Metal Concession in the History of the World. Persians, arabs, same diff. We call them targets. Nobody is saying cup of tea. But I bet we could do it better than we did Iraq.
Practice makes perfect.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:18 pm 9. Marcus Aurelius:Seems to me I have heard reports of Iran’s Sunni neighbors looking into building their own nuke plants. In any event, the Sunni world has nuclear weapons in the form of Pakistan.
As far as the idea that Iran will not possibly nuke Israel for fear of retaliation, there is the notion of plausible deniability. A bomb goes off in Tel Aviv, whodunnit? Iran of course will deny it, AQ may even claim credit, but of course that means retaliation against Pakistan not Iran.
I hear this argument all the time. Oh X wouldn’t dare do Y because then Z would massively retaliate. However, we all know for all affairs way to much of our population extends innocence way past reasonable doubts even for affairs not covered by the reasonable doubt test.
The Mumbai massacre is a great example of plausible deniability.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:29 pm 10. Scott:Mo, Iran can’t even produce enough gasoline to keep its cars and trucks running. They’ve lost one big Indian refiner, and they may lose the European ones as well. Iran’s economy will grind to a halt within weeks.
Iran’s military, like all Muslim militaries, is incompetent, top heavy, and has no real chain of command. Unlike Western militaries, if you kill Muslim generals, the rest scatter like mice…or rats.
The RGs are the Iranian storm troopers. Decimate them and there’s no real fighting force left. Unless you count sending Iranian children over mine fields or using them as suicide bombers. Muslims have shown SO much love for their kids this way.
Iran may get the bomb, but it will be destroyed as a result. Persian civilization has one way out: jettison Islam into oblivion and reclaim your ancient heritage.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:34 pm 11. Roderick Reilly:Whiskey:
You got good material for a graphic novel, but kind of crazy for real life, IMHO. DO like the “Gentry” designation though.
How would Iran go about nuking NYC? I mean, I could think of some scenarios, but it seems far-fetched.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:39 pm 12. mohammed:8. Staring In Disbelief
“I bet we could do it better than we did Iraq”
You mean bribe your way out of a fight after thousands of dead US soldiers and more thousands of amputated and disfigured GI’s. Sorry there isn’t any money left for that now. Whatever is left is for paying for the new army of unemployed. If Americans really wanted more war, Mccain would have won, but the few enlightened ones (educated whites, blacks and hispanics) put a plug on that.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:48 pm 13. Utopia Parkway:Iran will be mostly interested in taking the oil of its neighbors. Just think what their economy would be like if they could take the SA oil fields. If they had nukes they think they could do this easily, perhaps even without firing a shot. They believe that they have brass balls and their aggressiveness and inner strength will allow them to prevail over anyone. Also, their long range rockets will threaten even Europe to stay out of things.
In fact the economy of Iarn is so weak that if it doesn’t fall of its own weight soon any kind of conflict would create such a great humanitarian crisis there that the place would certainly fall. Into anarchy if nothing else. I assume that Israeli and US military planners understand this also.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:55 pm 14. DanM:mo,
“Bribe our way out” – Typical.. Typical…
I would love to see Obama get hard-nosed and roll up Iraq. It really takes a 3rd time to push the enemy populace into seeing that fighting with the gorilla is “maybe a bad idea”. Please, encourage your ilk.
Also, we’re probably feeding the troll… Apologies.
Jan 9, 2009 - 2:57 pm 15. mohammed:Are you deaf? There isn’t any money left. Fighting with the Gorilla? Fighting with the chihuahua may be like we saw in Vietnam.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:02 pm 16. esmoore5:Petraeus: Iran Ain’t So Bad
See:
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/01/petraeus-iran-a.html
I hope Petraeus is right.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:07 pm 17. DanM:Sorry, I meant “roll up Iran”… My kingdom for preview…
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:11 pm 18. Mongoose:esm5: Sounds like he is being taken out of context here — they seem like passing remarks. Have you seen the transcript?
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:17 pm 19. 49erDweet:Ignore the troll. He’s so delusional his comments are irrelevant. Whiskey seems a little too dour, for now, but only time will tell. Lots of ways to ship a nuke into NYC, but that’s not important.
Will the big “O” pass his first big ME test? My money says not, but I hope I’m wrong. It would help if our head guy actually HAD some experience, I suppose, but what-the-hey. If the NYT is happy then I guess all of the ‘Gentry’ are happy. Short-lived, of course. Enjoy it now, ’cause it will soon vanish.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:23 pm 20. mohammed:Petraeus: Iran Ain’t So Bad
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:28 pm 21. mohammed:He is just preparing the ground for avoiding war with Iran. He is softening the ’sheep’ up. Iran have its interest to guard you fools. Iran cooperated with the US in Afghanistan and Iraq at the beginning because it was in their interest for saddam and the taliban to go. Iran does not have a problem with the US, but with Israel, but Israel controls the US, so that becomes a misstatement. The US is too poor for a war. Now they are going to hide under Barrack Hussein Obama’s pragmatism to retreat. Why do you think they let Obama be president? Mccain’s rhetoric would have doomed America. I do not see where another trillion dollars will come from for a conflict that could potentially be the biggest and it will not stop in the middle east. Every empire has its acchilles heel and America’s is Israel. Sorry for you. They will suck you dry and move on.
mohammed = troll.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:32 pm 22. Fletcher Christian:Ti hee. That’s a new one. Come to think of it that may be good enough to start a riot somewhere.
#15 mohammed – More like fighting with Godzilla. My little country, the UK, could turn everything that matters in yours into smoke and ash, by itself. The USA is quite capable of making your entire country uninhabitable. (I assume that you live in some ME country – it doesn’t really matter which one.) And we will, if you annoy us enough.
Pray that your country falls apart in civil war before any Muslim nation gets the Bomb, apart from of course Pakistan, which already has it. In their case pray that the lunatics there don’t get their hands on it. If they do, and one of your firecrackers goes off in any Western country, than Islam dies in fire – and all its adherents go to another fire, where they belong.
There is no Devil but Satan, and Mohammed (hellfire and eternal damnation be upon him) is his Prophet.
By the way, nuclear weapons are quite cheap. Particularly when you already have them. And we do.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:33 pm 23. noprisoners:Stariing in Disbelief #7
To a rational person it seems that the Obamessiah would own the Iran crisis “hook, line and sinker”. However, now that Mohammed has chimed in, I hope that you can see that there are those who are not interested in the facts. The only question is how many. At this moment, I am guessing about 53% who would agree that it will be Bush’s fault.
Sad.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:36 pm 24. chachapoya:Why Mo, we’ll just print another trillion when we need it. It’s good to be king.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:44 pm 25. esmoore5:18. Mongoose:
“esm5: Sounds like he is being taken out of context here — they seem like passing remarks. Have you seen the transcript?”
This article was all I could find:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-01-09-voa16.cfm
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:44 pm 26. Eggplant:Contrarian:
“I’m interested in how you see this scenario developing.”
Many different scenarios have been previously described at Belmont Club.
1) Wretchard’s three conjectures: Islamic terrorists pop off American port cities one at a time with big nukes hidden in ocean freighter shipping containers (a scaled up version of Hamas shooting Qassams at Israel). There’s no defense against this mode of attack except to destroy the source. After several hits, the Americans become insanely pissed off and burn down a billion people.
2) Pakistan falls into chaos and religious fanatics take over. India and Pakistan start exchanging nuclear attacks. Pakistan can see it’s going down so it shoots a couple nukes at Israel. Israel is mortally wounded so it invokes its Samson Option and takes down all known enemies (most of the Islamic world). By this time the Iranians have nukes on ballistic missiles. The Iranians take a mortal hit from the Israelis so they opt to invite the Europeans and the Americans to the party. Scenario 2) then ends like scenario 1).
3) Iran develops full nuclear and ballistic missile capability. Somebody in an Iranian missile silo who really does believe in the 12th Iman decides to take things into his own hands, rewires a fail safe mechanism and launches a single nuke at the French. The French respond with their submarine launched ballistic missiles and burns down Iran. The Iranians can see they’re going down so they opt to take all known enemies with them. This includes the Israelis and the US. Scenario 3) then ends like scenario 1).
4) America does a full repeat of the Great Depression. Obama is taken from the White House in handcuffs and a handsome young man with a distinguished military record is declared Lord Protector of North America. The economy is still a mess so the Lord Protector needs a distraction to quiet the angry mobs. Maybe he plays games with the North Koreans or the Iranians. Maybe he does something really cyncial like pop off a captured ex-Soviet nuke in an economically ruined city like Detroit and then claims the Iranians did it. One thing leads to another and eventually scenario 4) ends like scenario 1).
5) Use your own imagination. Coming up with these scenarios was easy to do… The raw ingredients are already in place, e.g. bad guys with nuclear weapons, moonbats holding high office, the US facing economic ruin, etc.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:50 pm 27. mohammed:‘22.Fletcher Christian:
#15 mohammed – More like fighting with Godzilla’
You hit the nail on the head. Godzilla is a fictional character and does not exist. There goes the delusion I keep talking about.
Please, please don’t even bring up the UK. The UK should be wept for, it’s situation is beyond salvaging.
You are delusional to think that Iran will risk being bombed by bombing Israel. If the UN inspectors said that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons I do not see why I have to believe dimwits like you, especially after Iraq. Afterall Iran is a willing signatory to NPT unlike Israel, India or Pakistan.
Jan 9, 2009 - 3:56 pm 28. Contrarian:Mccain said it all Bomb, Bomb Iran. Even if it is jokingly. Your ass was whooped in Iraq. Bring the Iran invasion, let us see where America will be. IT IS BROKE.
You know why America will not attack Iran? Because Intelligent people are in charge not George ‘talking to God’ Bush. The whole oil infrastructure that America depends on is in Iran’s backyard. It will flatten it. No oil for America. Imagine taking off 20 million barrels off the market. $4 dollar gas gallon will become $400. And do not even think Israel will dream of doing it on its own. It would have done it now and not wait for HUSSEIN Obama. It is a missed opportunity for them, partly why they are taking it out on Gaza with such vehemence. They have done the math, they are not as stupid as you lot.
Eggplant,
Thanks for your response. My only thoughts are that these scenarios, serious though they are, are not “world wars” and not related to our economic crisis (except for option 4). Lots of folks seem to be suggesting that a world war will be the end result of our economic crisis, but I think this is kind of simplistic.
America did not enter WWII to cure the Depression, but due to geo-political conflicts, primarily with Japan in the Pacific Arena.
The nuclear scenarios you cite are very real possibilities, but could occur even if our economy was doing well.
Jan 9, 2009 - 4:27 pm 29. Lifeofthemind:There is a real possibility that BHO thinks that he will solve the problem by flooding Israel with US/Nato troops and evacuating the Jews. The presence of Samantha Power in the new administration can be charitably considered frightening. Israel will hopefully refuse to go quietly into the night. Despite a shortage of submarines the Israelis have the ability to credibly repel any threat.
Jan 9, 2009 - 4:37 pm 30. mohammed:26. Eggplant:
You have been speaking to God as well haven’t you? These scenario’s are products of some delusional minds who are high on an opiate concoction to nth degree.
Jan 9, 2009 - 4:44 pm 31. Annoy Mouse:We are all waiting for that day. Oohh we are so afraid. Bigots. No wonder George Bush got elected TWICE.
Frankly, as far as I’m concerned, the Israelis would be more than welcomed in the United States. We can trade their civilized population of approximately 7 million for the denizens of Detroit. I have little concern that they’d make something of it. Maybe we could sell it for a few trillion.
Jan 9, 2009 - 5:04 pm 32. JPS:Mohammed,
Israel does not control the U.S. Muslims cannot make a greater conceptual mistake than to believe it does. You were starting to make some interesting points (even if I’m tempted to argue), but this kind of statement makes me tend to write you off.
Look, suppose I’m an American patriot, which I am. Suppose I don’t give a damn about Israel. And suppose the people who’ve called for Israel to be wiped off the map since its inception were pro-Nazi during WWII, and pro-Soviet during the Cold War. Which side do you think I’m likelier to root for?
By the way, considering our ass was whooped, as you put it, in Iraq, things there do seem to be shaping up a lot closer to our hopes than to those of the Baathists, al Qaeda or, dare I say it, Iran.
Finally, you do yourself no favors by calling bigots those of us who think it’ll be a disaster for the world if Iran gets its hands on nuclear weapons. We are foolish, you say, for thinking Iran will risk being bombed by Israel–yet that famed moderate explained ten years ago that if Iran bombs Israel, no more Israel; whereas if Israel bombs back there will still be an Iran.
Are you one of these folks who disputes the translation or feels it was taken out of context? Do you deny that there are some in the Middle East who would gladly trade millions of Muslim lives if they could only wipe out Israel once and for all?
Because I’d love to believe you. I hope to God they wouldn’t, but as one of our generals put it, Hope is not a policy.
Jan 9, 2009 - 5:29 pm 33. ag:I’ve noticed a something resembling a pattern: after 911 and before the US responded there were a lot of “Mohammed”s popping up on various forums. They all song the same song for awhile, but went into hiding as soon as Afgan war started. Now they are popping up again. Something is cooking…
Jan 9, 2009 - 5:36 pm 34. mohammed:JPS you are a Zionist that is why you attempt to debunk that Israel controls the US. If ‘now vegetable’ sharon says it during an Israeli radio debate to Peres, then it is so. Israel controls the US, who do you think controls the US?
Voting George Bush twice more than qualifies you to be called dimwits, as for bigotry, there is no bigger bigotry than claim that Palestinian children felled by Israeli bullets is the fault of Hamas. Not even worth having an argument with you as your head is probably inside your ass right now full of shit.
ag:
Jan 9, 2009 - 5:47 pm 35. dla:There wont be any new wars my friend. Wishful thinking that is. America is almost on its knees,i t has seen nothing yet. The zionist will suck every penny. Slavery is back, because everybody is so scared for the economy they put their bigotry aside and voted a black african to be president. You are so yesterday my friends. The world will finally move on.
President Obama will face a daunting set of problems, none of which can be solved unilaterally.”
And thus begins the cry of the wussies.
Perry is absolutely wrong. This can be solved unilaterally.
Jan 9, 2009 - 5:50 pm 36. Eggplant:Annoy Mouse said:
“Frankly, as far as I’m concerned, the Israelis would be more than welcomed in the United States.”
I agree. For historical reasons the Israelis wouldn’t go willingly and we should encourage Israel to stay in the Middle East. However if things went badly for the Israelis and they needed to flee, we should make them the offer of living in the US.
Contrarian said:
“America did not enter WWII to cure the Depression, but due to geo-political conflicts, primarily with Japan in the Pacific Arena.”
This is certainly true. However Roosevelt did want to go to war against Germany (for excellent reasons) and was looking for an excuse. Hitler provided the best possible excuse by declaring war against America after we declared war against Japan.
Along these lines, it is interesting to speculate about the economic causes of World War II. Most of us were taught as children that Roosevelt overcame the Great Depression through Keynesian economic intervention. There are some revisionist historians who claim that Roosevelt’s policies were ineffective and that it was World War II that really ended the Great Depression. One can cook the numbers to make either case (I’m agnostic about this). However most historians agree that Hitler got Germany’s economy restarted from the Great Depression by building autobahns. This was an example of the successful use of Keynesian economic intervention. However no one seems bothered about how Hitler paid for those German public works projects. Germany was bankrupt after the double whammy of its hyper-inflation followed by the Great Depression. Obviously, Hitler paid for the autobahns by increasing Germany’s debt, probably through selling bonds to American, French and English investors. This brings us to the interesting point. Germany’s economy was up and running but had a huge public debt and a serious bone to pick with former enemies from World War I. I think it is clear that Hitler never planned on repaying that debt (doing so would have resulted in the return of hyper-inflation). It was probably Hitler’s intention from the very beginning to stiff his creditors by invading his neighbors and establishing Germany as a world empire. The interesting point here is the Keynesian economics behind the German autobahns were an organic part of Hitler’s over-all war plans.
Jan 9, 2009 - 5:56 pm 37. mohammed:36. Eggplant:
Jan 9, 2009 - 6:06 pm 38. JPS:Perpetually in debt and you are still talking about Keynes. The ultimate security a creditor has is that the addicted debtor will come for more, knowing that if they stiff their benefactor they wont be getting more. Unless America can invade half the world I do not see how it can borrow itself out of this shit hole. Do not compare this to the second world war because all countries were on their knees compared to America and were strong armed into making some dubious allegiances to America that is tied up into the economy. Britain only finished paying its debt 2 years ago. All crass adventures used to be paid for and the first gulf war actually brought in more money for America than it spent. However you cannot say the same for the second gulf war which was started by an imbecile called George who thought he was speaking to God.
Mohammed,
“Not even worth having an argument with you as your head is probably inside your ass right now full of shit.”
You’re not having an argument with me. You’re assuming facts not in evidence, refuting points I did not make, and flinging insults when I’ve been civil. Your very classy response says a good deal about your character.
Jan 9, 2009 - 6:08 pm 39. blert:‘22.Fletcher Christian:
#15 mohammed – More like fighting with Godzilla’
You hit the nail on the head. Godzilla is a fictional character and does not exist.
slo MO
You’d better look into the back round of the Godzilla myth.
Godzilla WAS real: it was a euphemism for the USAAF strikes on the cities of Japan.
The Godzilla Myth was whipped up by an uncle for his niece to explain how the bad old days of fire bombing were in the past, and that the Japanese had turned Godzilla’s wrath away… not by military means but by communication.
This story was so wonderful that all of the neighbors’ kids joined in to the oral tale…
Subsequently the uncle had his storyline reduced to print and it became a run-away best seller in the late 40’s Japan.
Subsequently, the story jumped to the big screen.
Godzilla really means the USAF.
Jan 9, 2009 - 6:09 pm 40. whiskey:Disbelief — it is a matter of record that:
Obama was born and raised a Muslim. Attended Mosque and recited the call to prayer in ARABIC for Matt Lauer on the air, calling it the most beautiful thing he’s ever heard. He went to Pakistan in the Summer of 1989 while at Columbia. Presumably he was not there for the girls.
As for logic, you are thinking like a Westerner. Obama’s pals Ayers and Dohrn bombed NYC fashionable places, as well as the Pentagon and police stations. Iran had as a matter of record (9/11 Commission) assisted the 9/11 plotters by not stamping the passports of the Muscle Hijackers. Who were escorted through Iranian customs by the head of the IRGC (sworn CIA testimony to the 9/11 Commission).
What does Iran gain? Submission.
Muslims believe that highly aggressive acts (see Bombay, 9/11, the Cole, Embassy Bombings) will create … SURRENDER in the West. Given that the elites want to surrender. Every bombing provokes a visit to a mosque by Western leaders. Muslim footbaths, in public universities, Muslims only prayer rooms, concessions on polygamy and “blasphemy” and other things, such as Sharia.
After the 7/7 bombings, the Labor government instituted Sharia. Allows Choudary to demand that Muslims rule Britain from Southwick as a Muslim state. The Gentry wishes this.
As for who will impeach Obama, the opposition will be all those paid in worthless, inflated dollars. Including the Auto Industry, manufacturers in general, the White Working and Middle Class, oil and gas interests, mining and timber interests, real estate developers and housing builders, office park builders, all those who depend on a rising economy which has been the case since 1945. Which is most of the American economy, save the Legal, Entertainment, Media, and Government sectors.
Obama at his heart HATES Whites, America, Jews, Israel, Christianity, for complex reasons associated with his father’s and mother’s abandonment, racial identity politics, being “Black Enough,’ his rocky relations with women, and so on. He’s been a small time con who lucked into winning against a weak, semi-Democratic Republican opponent against a weak, pathetically unskilled Republican incumbent. Hell of course he wants NYC nuked, just like Susan Sontag and Norman Mailer celebrated (as a matter of record) 9/11. Or his Pastor, Rev. Wright for that matter.
The Gentry was that of a NYT columnist, who noted the narrowness of Democratic interests and how the mass of voters can turn on Dems if they don’t deliver.
Iran senses weakness, Obama and Co. want to disarm America nuclear wise unilaterally to “set an example” and of course in that case we can be bullied with impunity.
However, America is too big and has too many powerful economic interests that Obama cannot satisfy and will be relied upon to turn on him. He can’t print enough money to cover all the needs, and that means that everyone around the manufacturers, builders, energy producers, timber interests, agribusiness, etc. will be angry and broke and looking to replace him.
It’s easier to be a tyrant in a small country. Hitler had 42 known attempts on him, mostly coming from the Military which was a competing power center. America is much bigger than the Third Reich was, with far more competing power centers, and a military which already loathes Obama, and Dems, and powerful interests who want him gone. [Inflation is only good if global trade continues, which is unlikely given the fragility of the current system. Debased currencies mean foreign exports are cheaper, competitive advantage for exporters. But that assumes a foreign market. Agribusiness, Energy, and Manufacturers with no foreign market and inflated, worthless currency will soon turn on Obama. And the Presidency is a WEAK institution, with many Congressional power centers as an alternative. Look at the infighting NOW.]
A Dictator must be willing to kill, often personally, to install a reign of terror. Obama is no dictator, he is a bloodless technocrat who hates Whites, Jews, and America (as seen by his choice of Pastor, Church, friends, policies, and dislike which is instinctual of the Flag and other American symbols. He is the Angry Entitled Yuppie, even worse than Clinton and likely to be the biggest disaster.]
Unseen by many: Nuclear Proliferation means war on the cheap. Nuke an enemy’s cities and major military bases pre-emptively, strike first, and you roll in without opposition. Crush and rule the enemy populace which is mostly dead anyway.
Modern mechanized armies and the power of combined arms meant taking on a modern neighbor was expensive. Nuclear proliferation negates that. The AK-47 and ubiquity of guerilla movements and suppliers meant that low level war could drag on for decades. Nuclear proliferation now offers a magic bullet for that problem too. Iran wants Iraq? Simply nuke Baghdad, Basra, and Mosul, problem solved! Roll in with almost no opposition. Control the people and the oil. Heck roll to the Med, take over Turkey, Syria, Greece, the Balkans, Egypt, etc. and whoever does not have nukes (and does not fire FIRST).
Corollary: nuclear proliferation means whoever strikes FIRST wins. Since the forces won’t be survivable, no second strike, which still takes a modern industrial state like the US, USSR, or China to construct.
Jan 9, 2009 - 6:53 pm 41. Alexis:Iran fights to the last Lebanese Shi’ite.
Jan 9, 2009 - 8:06 pm 42. marymcl:I love how mohammed says Zionist like it’s a bad thing.
Actually he reminds me a lot of the Revolutionary Communist Party. Back in the early 80’s the RCP used to station people with bullhorns down at the Pike Place Market in Seattle. The comrades would harangue the people passing by. They also put out a newspaper and for a while they were turning up everywhere. They were Maoists, and there was this very strident, didactic tone to their way of expression that mohammed’s stuff reflects beautifully.
Jan 9, 2009 - 8:10 pm 43. History - Cross Eyed:–I love how mohammed says Zionist like it’s a bad thing.
Oh – is that imbecilic savage troll on this thread too. Hey buddy, don’t you have a lonely goat to service?
Why don’t you show your true dedication to your religion and give up infidel inventions like cell phones, medicine, computers, personal hygiene, scientific knowledge, and caring for other human beings?
Jan 9, 2009 - 8:23 pm 44. Lifeofthemind:@Alexis,
Jan 9, 2009 - 8:28 pm 45. Lifeofthemind:Looks like Iran is more eager for the Sunni of Hamas and the Druze and Christians of Lebanon to catch ammo for them. My hope is that Israel lances the boil by eliminating the Iranian import facilities and the Syrian cabal. Anytime in the last 8 years would have been reasonable.
Chicago was always infested with the full alphabet soup of left wing parties the Revolutionary Communist Party, the New American Movement, the Young Socialist Party, the Sparticist Youth League and the Revolutionary Communist Youth Brigade. They were all organized according to the religious and economic backgrounds of their membership. In other words one group was the children of Jewish school teachers and another was composed of the children of Protestant accountants etc. One evening I observed a group meeting of the entire brain trust after a demonstration. I knew several of them and they knew my politics. Everything was very friendly and orderly. I leaned forward and expressed my surprise to a bearded young man about how well everything was working. He replied quietly “Don’t you see what we are doing? Keep your eyes on the RCYB. When they sit down stand up, when they stand up sit down.”
Jan 9, 2009 - 8:38 pm 46. Contrarian:Eggplant,
Hope this string keeps going.
Germany was mired in Depression well before 1929. The Nazi policies were very Keynesian, in fact, Keynes himself considered the fascist economic model superior to the free market model. His practitioners today, from Republicans like Bush I and II to Democrats like Clinton and soon to be Pres. Obama, are really soft-core fascists. Thus, the surge towards state capitalism that we are currently witnessing.
The economic causes of WWII are: Germany’s desire to reverse the effects of Versailles and expand their sphere of influence; and Japan’s desire to solve it’s problem of limited natural resources and create an Asian sphere of influence. These objectives, which were vital national interests of both countries, brought them into conflict with what would become the Allies of WWII.
Roosevelt’s policies were ineffective. I guess that makes me a revisionist, if not a contrarian. Here are some stats to reflect on: US Unemployment in 1933 when Roosevelt was inaugurated was 24.9%. Six years later, at the edge of war, the rate was 17.2%. A year later with war mobilization moving forward the rate fell to 14.6%, and then dropped in 1941 to 9.9%. During our first year of involvement in the war, 1942, the rate was 4.2%. There is no clearer representation that Roosevelt’s New Deal policies had little effect on economic recovery, but that war mobilization, which eventually took 12 million working age men into the armed forces, was the key factor.
Jan 9, 2009 - 9:58 pm 47. ag:Exercise you imagination, Mohammed.
. Even
I said “something is cooking” and you replied “There wont be any new wars my friend. Wishful thinking that is.” Sound like a streight Pavlovian reaction to me, not even a wishful thinking, because there is no thinking involved. The thing I called “Something” could be anything: famine, epidemic, pestilence, continuing reduction in oil consumption
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/09/the-good-news-is-if-this-sucker-blows-global-warming-is-not-going-to-be-a-problem/ Although the last one has nothing to do with allah.
And, BTW, I am not your friend.
Jan 9, 2009 - 10:39 pm 48. veracious:All,
Now come’s Lloyd’s $350 million fine for laundrying Iran and Suda funny money. How ’bout we bet that the total amount of money just passing from our religious friends to whereever it wants to go, in spite of all the security breaches, is gonna be, my est., several hundred billions per year. Talk about a intelligent breach, broken assumptions, easy funding of terrorist activities and nuke development.
Jan 9, 2009 - 10:48 pm 49. cjm:maybe obama will grab iran’s oil fields. let the mullah’s try and hold onto power without oil to sell. i have a feeling the next couple of years will be good times (but not for the m’s).
Jan 9, 2009 - 11:28 pm 50. twobyfour:I wish we had a troll like Aisha on LGF. She was funny, had a thorough knowledge of all things Islam. And she was actually a he.
In our case, we get a troll with 100% lefty talking points and logic (or the lack of it thereof), who is no muslim, with understanding of Islam only from 5th hand, and he is actually a she.
Jan 9, 2009 - 11:38 pm 51. twobyfour:I think there would be a repeat of this thread sooner than later, so I skip scenarios for now, for the lack of time.
Just one quickie, I think Iran won’t lob its first nuke (if Iran gets an opportunity to finish their program) into Israel. Their goal is to start a WWIII. Wiping out Israel may not be enough. Their first target are Russia, USA, China. In that order. In the ensuing mayhem, they can then nuke Israel at their leasure through their proxy. This is how they think.
Jan 9, 2009 - 11:50 pm 52. Eggplant:Contrarian said:
“Hope this string keeps going.”
Agreed. I believe the experiences of the Great Depression and the events just prior to WW-II are very relevant to our current situation.
Contrarian went on:
“Germany was mired in Depression well before 1929.”
That was their period of hyperinflation. When I lived in Germany, I would go to the flea market and buy old German inflation money. The bank notes are quite attractive and inexpensive (the Germans have always been good at making attractive money). Some of the old bank notes were denominated at a billion marks and higher (they were in a situation not unlike what Zimbabwe is in today). After going through hyper-inflation and recovering the value of their currency by demonetizing the old Reichsmark, the Germans then got whacked with the Great Depression. It’s no wonder they were suckers for Adolf Schickelgruber’s demagoguery. In contrast, we Americans allowed ourselves to be seduced by a demagogue (Obama) while being in no where near as bad of shape as the Germans (heaven help us when things get really bad).
Contrarian continued:
“The Nazi policies were very Keynesian, in fact, Keynes himself considered the fascist economic model superior to the free market model.”
Funny that…
“His practitioners today, from Republicans like Bush I and II to Democrats like Clinton and soon to be Pres. Obama, are really soft-core fascists. Thus, the surge towards state capitalism that we are currently witnessing.”
Political ideology is a circle. If you keep going right, you’ll eventually find yourself with Communists. Likewise if you keep going left, you’ll eventually find yourself with Fascists. I should mention that I’m a fan of President Bush (II) for his strong stand against Islamic Fascism but must admit that he did a poor job of managing the economy.
Contrarian continued:
“The economic causes of WWII are: Germany’s desire to reverse the effects of Versailles and expand their sphere of influence; and Japan’s desire to solve it’s problem of limited natural resources and create an Asian sphere of influence.”
I agree about Japan and partially about Germany. Again, my position on Germany is that Hitler’s economic policies formed an organic part with his military goals (the two were like Yin and Yang). His Liebensraum objectives in Soviet Russia were the payoff both in military and economic terms for all of his prior military and economic investments. When seen in this context, Hitler’s idiotic strategic decision to launch Operation Barbarossa without first conquering England makes a certain amount of sense. At the time, England was economically dependent upon its empire (the island of Britain was almost depleted of natural resources). Conquering the British would have bought Hitler nothing from an economic perspective while imposing the requirement of suppressing hoards of fiercely angry Englishmen who were among the world’s most experienced soldiers.
Contrarian continued:
“Roosevelt’s policies were ineffective. I guess that makes me a revisionist, if not a contrarian. Here are some stats to reflect on: US Unemployment in 1933 when Roosevelt was inaugurated was 24.9%. Six years later, at the edge of war, the rate was 17.2%. A year later with war mobilization moving forward the rate fell to 14.6%, and then dropped in 1941 to 9.9%.”
Again, I’m agnostic about this issue (the Hoover versus Roosevelt policy differences were debated endlessly during the Great Depression and afterwards with no clear conclusions). I believe the numbers supporting either argument can be cooked to advance any thesis. However, it would be advantageous to better understand this issue since we maybe on the verge of another economic depression. For what it’s worth, my gut tells me that Obama’s economic policies will fail. However I’m emotionally biased against Obama (I detest demagogues and moonbats).
Jan 10, 2009 - 12:22 am 53. twobyfour:@ 52. Eggplant
“Political ideology is a circle”
It is a tad bit more complicated.
Make it a sphere.
N = libertism
S = totalitarianism
w = conservatism
E = liberalism
There is another dimension stasism/dynamism, but I have a hard time to visualize 4d sphere myself.
Just to give you an example how the 4th dim works:
Jan 10, 2009 - 12:43 am 54. Subotai Bahadur:Conservative/totalitarian/stasist = Islam
Conservative/libertist/dynamist = section of GOP
Conservative/libertist/stasist = some “Paleocons”
#40 Whiskey
I see that you are giving the short form of the optimistic case. In that event, I only disagree with you on one point:
Obama is no dictator, he is a bloodless technocrat
I see no reason for this belief. He would not have to do it himself; any more that a certain Austrian named Schickelgruber or a certain Georgian named Djugashvili had to do the killing themselves. There were more than enough willing members of the Schutz-Staffel or Cheka/OGPU/GPU so that neither had to do their own “wet work”.
We have been engaged in the Cold Civil War for a generation. The Left, the Democrats and their allies, do not consider their political/cultural opposition to be fellow citizens or human. Just review the epithets of the last few decades. They have contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law. Violence and felonies are already routinely excused as being part of the “ends” and “means” argument. During the election, I have personal knowledge of a group of Democrat city officials in Pueblo, Colorado calling for the imprisonment in concentration camps of all Republicans and conservatives if Obama should win. This was at a social gathering, and their tongues had been lubricated just enough for them to speak their minds. The very language one hears whenever Democrats’ real words escape [remember, "bitter clingers to guns and religion"] shows their contempt for us.
When things start going south, I have every expectation that deaths, intimidation, and disappearances will be resorted to as they try to cling to power; knowing that a real election would mean payback for what they have done to the country.
There is no more a Socialist dictator who is not a murderous tyrant in the end, than all of the darlings of the Left who became dictators in their own countries were “Peaceful Agrarian Reformers™”. There is a natural human tendency to hope that their enemies, once ascendent, are not as bad as objective observation would show them to be. That hope, historically, has never been fullfilled.
Three Chinese curses:
May you live in Interesting Times.
May you get your wish.
May you come to the attention of the Authorities.
All three are coming to pass… now.
Subotai Bahadur
Jan 10, 2009 - 12:46 am 55. twobyfour:Ah, its simple. The stasist/dynamist is going from front to back so it’s 180 deg offset from N/S meridian, so if you see this as a circle with NWSE at 12/3/6/9 o’clock, the stasist/dynamist meridian is the circumference.
Clear as mud?
Jan 10, 2009 - 12:56 am 56. twobyfour:Subotai, on the same page. Of course I wish to be pleasantly surprised, but I have no illusions.
Jan 10, 2009 - 1:00 am 57. Lifeofthemind:Mussolini was popular with the left, the term Fascist didn’t really become a pejorative until well after the rise of Hitler. Indeed there were hopes that Italy could be used to shore up the French and British side to help prevent the Anschluss.
Right now the Democrats are filled with a nostalgia for a time well before most of them were even born. They talk of the CCC and the WPA and even of vast mobilizations, without of course imagining themselves as privates or laborers. The entire project is profoundly reactionary.
Jan 10, 2009 - 1:31 am 58. twobyfour:@ 57. Lifeofthemind
Mussolini was a bona fide socialist. But then he looked at how it would work, took a peek east and saw Lenin’s NEP, he thought “Here’s the ticket… why time cap a good thing — corporate socialism!”
He established his sturmabteilung called “Fasci di Combatinento” and viola! Fascism was born.
Of course, like any leftist that acquired power, he was a jealous deity. He hated other leftists, because they were blind to how they were wrong. Well, the same zeal with which Bolsheviks regarded Mensheviks, or Leninists regarded Trockists, etc. etc.
Once the left gets really into power, their mortalest enemies are other leftists and they eat them for a snack. That is the only positive aspect of the whole thing. Nothing else.
Re WPA, them lefties of course presume they will be in charge, it is for us rubes to dig holes and fill them back again. Deluded fools. The elite would never be larger than 2%, it is a matter of economics. The rest may not be diggers, but they would be ass kissers. They may get as a reward $1000 check from the government while there is still a value to redistribute, but it soon will be worth a fraction of nominal value because there won’t be anything more to redistribute, after all the nomenclatura elite 2% would need their privileges and perks.
Jan 10, 2009 - 8:06 am 59. Richard:The attached link has so info on the direction we are heading in relationship with Iran.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2009/01/mil-090109-voa01.htm
Jan 10, 2009 - 8:12 am 60. HV:#50: Hmm… a female troll? I wonder who that could be?
#26: The Three Conjectures – As I recall, going by memory only, the scenario said that the massive US second strike on the Muslim world would be dictated by an urgent need to prevent further strikes, not by the American public being pissed off. Correct me if I’m wrong.
I would love to know what goes through Obama’s mind as he sits through his ongoing education in national security – the nuclear war operational plans for instance. I would hope these still get top priority. It seems to me a naif like O would need a lot of training as CinC on how to conduct a nuclear war.
Jan 10, 2009 - 8:35 am 61. Jay:The Italian and French Fascists were socialists who decided that it was better to work with the capitalists and have a controlled economy. The Soviets called the Nazis fascists. But the Nazis were different.
Jan 10, 2009 - 9:46 am 62. slade:The members of the Nazi party went from the left (the SA) to nationalists and even some monarchists who gave up on Wilhelm. Once Hitler came to real power he turned over the economy to Schacht who turned the German economy to autarchy. The German economy was in shambles except for the armaments industries when WW2 began.
Hitler refused to allow total mobilization. So they resorted to slave labor after their early successes.
The Germans became hardened from the WW1 struggle. We on the other hand are a soft nation of rent seekers and lazy young college graduates who have degrees but little useful knowledge. We are infested with lawyers.
I tihik tat the term Gentry that whiskey uses is the combination of leftist lawyers, blacks, radical Mexican-Americans, single young women AND what the Pitt professor calls the Creative Class.
We had a thread about six weeks ago where Programmer and others debated on the contributions of the computer geeks. Many of the computer types are paranoid libetarians who believe in free software – the Open Source gang. I live in a city where there a many such types, rich and poor. But real computer pros know that software has a shelf life and the code has to be updated and rewritten.
A friend of mine who does political polling told me that the Creative Class voted for O and are inclined liberal not because their income depends on the state but because the believe that the old economy is not COOL.
When voters in a democracy can not fathom the connection between government policies and their own and their family welfare the democracy comes apart. Democracies are inherently unstable as has been shown by research in the Public Choice school of social science.
I think that many of us to read and contribute here have a sense that we are going into an unstable mode. It is important to learn about the New Deal and the political economy of the US in the 30’s and what happened in Europe. This new Keynsianism by so many well known economists is really scary. They are deluding themselves and policy makers.
Another thing that nobody talks about is that the loss or diminution of a domestic manufacturing sector, such as the automobile industry – which many are willing, if not eager to let die – creates huge vulnerability for manufacturing war materiel, as required. In my view future “kinetic” conflicts will be a combination of conventional and nuclear forces, but the policy dialectic or paradigm has shifted – prematurely, but shifted just the same.
In this country, but not China or Russia where modernizing the nuclear arsenal and ancillary weaponry has become a top spending priority (ref. Bill Gertz).
Jan 10, 2009 - 10:30 am 63. marymcl:This slightly off track, but the Versailles treaty always comes up in conversations about the start of WWII, and since we’re “still talking about Keynes” as Teresita says, I have an ax to grind about both concerning the general tide of capitulation and defeatism in the West.
Keynes was a major proponent of the wrong yet widely believed idea that Versailles was so onerous and unfair it made the rise of National Socialism inevitable. Every movie star and public school teacher in the western world knows this is true, right?
Nevertheless, Versailles left Germany politically, geographically and yes, economically intact. None of those who preach today that WWI was stupid and pointless compared to the righteous war against the Nazis know or care about Germany’s treaty with Russia at Brest Litovsk the previous year, whereby Germany exacted from the Russians a territory larger than the Austro-Hungarian Empire, most of their industrial and mining capacity, a third of their railways, and nearly a third of their population.
The West forgot all about German aggression and territorial ambitions before Hitler as quickly as the Germans did when whining about how they’d been fatally wronged by terms far kinder than the ones they’d given Russia, and every ounce of guilt about Versailles was worth a pound of manipulation to the Nazis. Same thing today, especially regarding the decades-long and highly successful war of words against Israel.
Jan 10, 2009 - 10:42 am 64. Subotai Bahadur:#60 HV
I see the Conjectures coming into play like this. If Wretchard weighs in, I will of course yield to him. Assume a nuclear detonation on our soil. Further assume that under any regime dominated by Democrats, Hussein Pasha or not, that the “high road” is not to retaliate in an equivalent fashion, but to seek some way of avoiding doing so. Kind of like Clinton’s Sudanese aspirin factory. The goal will be similar to Clinton’s; to please the State Department and to convince the media that something was being done.
In that situation, there is no disincentive or disability preventing a repeat strike by Muslim terrorists and/or whichever nation state supported their efforts [4 suspects there]. As we have seen in recent history, in the absence of a stunning counter-reaction, that Muslim terrorist attacks will be repeated if they sense weakness or hesitation. Our reactions to WTC-1, the embassy bombings, Khobar Towers bombing, and the USS COLE did nothing to deter 9/11.
Let us assume that Hussein Pasha does effectively nothing. That nothing will include not doing anything effective to counter the undoubted economic effects of a strike. Remember, there was a real and effective economic stimulus program in the wake of 9/11 in the form of tax cuts, [not handing bundles of cash to Democrat supporters as we are now doing].
We are already in dire economic straits. Further, there is no prospect of it doing anything but getting worse. Right now, smart small business owners in my area are either cutting back or shutting down their businesses under the assumption that after the new regime gets going they will lose everything anyway and at least now they can get something when they cash out. Add the economic dislocations from the loss of a major city on top of our government inflicted problems, and we are in Depression country.
A populace that is hungry, unemployed, and has no real hope for improvement is not going to take kindly to being nuked with impunity by a foreign entity. Hussein Pasha’s regime likely will have to worry about hearing the American equivalent of the old French song, “Ah! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira“.
Now, let us assume though, that they succeed for a time in not retaliating for the loss of an American city. The lesson learned by the enemy, or more accurately enemies as there is no unified command structure; will be that one can strike the “Great Satan” near mortal blows with relative impunity. As soon as one of those enemies can accumulate either 25 kg of weapons grade U-235 or 8 kg. of plutonium, and access to relatively simple machine tools and an expendable crew of machinists, the attack will be repeated. The fissile materials source, of course, will have to be one of the 4 suspect countries noted above. Design is not a problem. Any first year college physics student could design a working, albeit inelegant, device that would function. And there are numbers of open source designs extent.
The reaction of an American populace, which would not yet be converted to Hussein’s dream equivalent of the “New Soviet Man”, to a second detonation on US soil, OR TO REPORTS [true or false] THAT A SECOND ATTEMPT HAD BEEN FOILED; could not be contained. If Hussein Pasha was lucky, he would escape on Air Force One to whatever country would have him. His minions would not fare so well. Whichever government takes power by whatever means in the aftermath would have as its highest imperative the prevention of a recurrence. The very least one could expect would be an open declaration that if we are hit again, that the heavens would literally fall on ANYONE we even suspect could threaten us. More likely, there would just be a large crop of mushrooms growing in the Middle East, fairly immediately.
#61 Jay
I agree with your characterization of many of Hussein Pasha’s supporters, and note that this is the logical result of the generation long Cold Civil War. We really do not share a common culture or world view with these other people who exist inside the boundaries of what was at one time a single nation. This is an issue that cannot go unresolved forever.
#63 Marymcl
Versailles was a bearable treaty, and if the adjustments to reparations schedules that were being made due to economic conditions could have been done in a timely manner, and allowed to take effect; the first German economic collapse might not have taken place. I view it as being French intransigence and desire for vengeance over all [See the French-Belgian occupation of the Ruhr in January 1923] that led to the conditions that brought about the rise of the National Socialists and made the war in Europe inevitable. Your mileage may vary.
Subotai Bahadur
Jan 10, 2009 - 12:11 pm 65. Al_Batross:“Somebody in an Iranian missile silo who really does believe in the 12th Iman decides to take things into his own hands” – Eggplant
Eggplant
Jan 10, 2009 - 3:02 pm 66. veracious:I take it that you have some doubts about the sincerity of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s belief in the Hidden Iman ? I have wondered about that in the past, but I have not heard that he has ever publicly expressed doubts about the Iman or, more importantly, the imminence of his return to earth ? He appears to be believe that he is one of the Iman’s special helpers, “a nail”, and some have even suggested that he may be the Iman himself.
This might all just be an act for the humble poor of Iran, who are accepting hardships and the cost of the nuclear programme in the belief that they will receive holy jam tomorrow, but if Ahmadinejad is actually pursuing some carnal schemes of his own, why run down the oil industry and waste so many resources on the nuclear program ? And why do such a good job of convincing Israel that he intends to get a bomb, and will use it ? He has even convinced the French government of his hostile intentions. Why bother to do that ?
So, it seems to me to make more sense to believe that he is what he seems to be: a convinced Shia Twelver, who is wrecking Iran’s economy in a rush to get a nuclear weapon. He believes he can afford to wreck the economy because he is not planning to build up a strategic nuclear force, with all the support systems that would require, he is only planning for the Apocalypse, for the events necessary to initiate the appearance of the Hidden Iman, after which it will all be about divine intervention, and the boring economics and organised military stuff will just go hang.
It also seems to me that Ahmadinejad really is in the driving seat of this situation, and that unless some of the more realist Ayatollahs decide that they have had enough and dump him, then it really will come down to who shoots first, Iran or Israel ?
Slade@62 et al,
I’ve the same instinct about losing so large a portion of our car manufacturing, for the same security concerns, e.g., being able to switch manufacturing easiely from cars to mil. vehicles.
Similarily, I regret loses in other manufacturing or in general, production! Then, it seems obvious to me that sending your military manufacturing overseas, to just _friends, is folly, especially e.g., key Cruise Missle guidance system components.
Over…
Jan 10, 2009 - 3:45 pm 67. Steynian 306 « Free Canuckistan!:[...] GEE, D’YA THINK?!? Former Secretary of Defense William Perry predicts that a nuclear Iran will challenge the [...]
Jan 10, 2009 - 4:25 pm 68. Lifeofthemind:The assumption that 21st century automotive plants can be shifted to useful war production because it was possible 65 years ago may be misplaced.
Jan 10, 2009 - 7:24 pm 69. slade:Well LoTM at least you analysts are thinking about it, which would be the point to those of us blowing snow in flyover country. It’s the confidence factor, which, right now, is low.
Low.
Jan 10, 2009 - 7:49 pm 70. Storm-Rider:“Whether BHO can handle the world any better than he did in Chicago remains to be seen. But even if the new President were superbly competent the world may now be in an unmanageable condition.”
The question is not competence – the question is loyalty.
Jan 10, 2009 - 10:01 pm 71. Subotai Bahadur:#70 Storm-Rider
With all due respect, in reference to Hussein Pasha; there are questions on those issues?
I think that matters are pretty well resolved on both, not in our favor; but resolved.
I submit that the unresolved questions outstanding are:
1) How bad is it going to get, in what specific ways?
2) How will we respond?
3) Will the Oath be defended, by whom, and how?
4) Successfully?
Subotai Bahadur
Jan 10, 2009 - 10:27 pm 72. SunSword:In an actual conflict between Iran and the USA, Iran would be turned into a 17th century nation. Because — the USA does not need to invade Iran, on the contrary, it would not do so. The USA would merely:
(a) Take out the Iranian air defenses, sink the Iranian navy, and destroy their ports
(b) Blockade the ports so no shipping in or out
(c) Destroy their refinery so no more gasoline
(d) Bomb every hydroelectric or other electrical power generation station, plus all transformer stations
(e) Bomb the high voltage lines
With no gasoline or ability to generate electrical power, and no shipping of oil for revenue — no shipping of anything in or out by sea — Iran would become a 17th century nation again.
And oh by the way — if we REALLY wanted to prevent them from developing nukes, this approach works just fine. Takes a lot of electrical generation and distribution capacity to spin all those centrifuges and light, heat, and cool those underground labs and assembly areas.
Jan 10, 2009 - 11:50 pm 73. Eggplant:twobyfour said:
“In our case, we get a troll with 100% lefty talking points and logic …”
I had similar suspicions. A few questions about Islam or in Arabic might have embarrassed the troll into silence. However it is usually best to ignore trolls.
Al_Batross asked:
“I take it that you have some doubts about the sincerity of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s belief in the Hidden Iman?”
I believe that Ahmadinejad is a cynical politician with little real power. I also believe that Ahmadinejad is serving as a Goebbels style minister of propaganda for the mullahs who hold actual political power in Iran. Ahmadinejad will be removed from public view after the mullahs grow tired of him or find him an embarrassment. Ahmadinejad’s media comments should be regarded as irrelevant noise. However I do believe the Iranian nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs are genuine threats to world peace. Those programs should be terminated with preemptive military raids ***if*** it is technically possible without using nuclear weapons. However it maybe impossible to destroy the Iranian nuclear strategic weapons without using our own nuclear weapons (their uranium enrichment facilities maybe buried too deep). If that’s true then the problem is too hard for me to form a valid opinion.
Jan 11, 2009 - 5:00 pm 74. Al_Batross:“***if*** it is technically possible without using nuclear weapons” – Eggplant.
I think it may not be possible without something very special. There was the “Rods from God” idea maybe 2 years ago, Kinetic energy weapons released from the upper atmosphere which might penetrate the deepest bunkers, but maybe that was just a figment.
Jan 12, 2009 - 2:15 pmI fear it is going to come down to action by the Israelis, with whatever they can cook up…
Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.