Uh huh.

How long does it take to put a nuke program together?

They did it in 2 years? Only now do they feel threatened?

Impressive, most impressive, especially after shouting “Death to America” since 1979.

As to their claims they need it, I saw the 10 minute segment on Die Welt last year, hogwash.

They have more than enough, especially when we won’t need most of “the world’s” anymore.

You’re still not paying attention.

Iranians did NOT select that lunatic, any more than Venezuelans selected Chavez.

And if you think free Iraqis will voluntarily ally themselves with another dictator, you have zero comprehension of human nature.

If we are “enraging” Muslims worldwide, it is because those people are being fed enraging lies by their own dictators, by the majority of the world press (fighting the death of the UN and “internationalism”), and by the American Left (for the same reasons).

I will not be manipulated by dictators, press barons, or Chavez-worshippers. Nor should such people determine the course of history.

Given that 60% or more of the Iranians have just voted to elect “Hitler” as their President, what should we do about that, David Thomson and others? And what should we do about the fact that the new democratically elected government of Iraq is likely to be quite close to the present Iranian government?

The fact is we actually DO have lots of military options for dealing with Iran. Everything from airstrikes to, yes, an invasion and occupation. We did D-Day in ‘44, doubtlessly we can do it again. Are people here really ready to put up or shut up?

Insult today’s Neville Chamberlins all that you want — but don’t pretend for a moment that the ALTERNATIVE to appeasment in 2006 does not necessitate a loss of life that will dwarf what has been suffered so far in Iraq. Also come clean about the fact that there is no light at the end of the tunnel in this clash of civilizations that according to your more accurate view of the world we have no choice but to fight.

Show me a post “World War IV” scenario in which millions of Muslims are not enraged at the West and tens of thousands are not willing to die as jihadis, and I’ll show you another liberal pipedream masquerading as neoconservative vision. (Or perhaps just another Straussian “noble lie”.) Insist that radical Islam is likely to be no more popular post- WWIV than Nazism was popular among the children of Goethe and Beethoven after WWII, and I’ll remind you not to hit the crackpipe before you post.

In case you wonder what I think — I think that WW IV can still be avoided.

It would be imprudent to base our policies on the outside possibility that Iran is only interested in the peaceful use of nuclear energy. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a likely nihilist who explicitly threatens the West. There was also once upon a time some guy named Adolph Hitler who wrote Mein Kampf wherein he clearly outlined his plans for the holocaust and world domination. Useful idiots throughout the world dismissed his rants as mere political hyperbole. Letís not make that mistake again.

Many Iranians are indeed pro American. In many respects, much of the countryís religious leadership seems more fascist than nihilistic. However, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seems to share the mindset of Al Quaeda. He is the dude with the ability to bring about Armageddon. That is the point we must focus on. It matters little if possibly even 90% of the Iranian population desires peace if Ahmadinejad has his finger on the button—which can launch a nuclear weapon.

I am certainly not denying that rogue states and terrorism are a bad combination. This is what made the invasion of Afghanistan necessary. However, this focus purely on the rogue state angle seems to me a product of wishful thinking. That is, our military knows how to conduct state to state, army to army warfare, and is very good at it. The more we focus on states, the more we get to play to our strengths. This is part of what made the Iraq adventure so appealing to many people. They got to thinking they were combating terrorism and could do so by doing what America does best, spending about a week rolling up some backwater army. Unfortunately, actually combating terrorism is not given to such clean brute force solutions, as we have been learning in Iraq for the past couple of years.

Mr. Thomson says, disagreeing with my point that the Iranians and the al Qaeda types are different, ìNothing could be further from the truth. Both are true believing nihilists. this is all that matters. Only death and destruction satisfies their existential cravings.î

Now Mr. Thomson, while it may be comforting to paint all your adversaries as caricatures of evil, it manages to utterly miss the point. They are two different groups and that is clear to anyone who has been paying attention to anything they say or how they behave. Iranian Intelligence was helping us out during the Afghan war. After all, why would they cooperate with people who think theyíre infidels and would not have a second thought about wiping them off the face of the earth? And of course, there is the Iraq example I cited previously. A lot of people like to ignore the fact that we have the same allies in Iraq as the Iranians do. I think it upsets their neatly bipolar worldview.

SandyP, challenging my thoughts on the possibility of stability through mutual assured destruction with a nuclear Iran writes (of the Iranians), ìYou are applying semi-rational western, civilized thought/hope to a cult which is neither western, civilized nor (semi-) rational.î

While I certainly have no great faith in the rationality of religious fundamentalists of any stripe, I do not think Iranís behavior with respect to the nuclear question so far has been particularly irrational. If one is the only nuclear-free and as yet uninvaded member of the “Axis of Evil,” one is not behaving inrrationally by seeking out a nuclear capability for defensive reasons. This is especially so when the US has already the invaded countries on either side. And while we’re on the subject of irrational behavior, it’s not as though the neocon types have changed their minds about the desirability of invading Iran.

Also, while we are postulating here that Iran is going after nuclear weapons, I will also add that the official Iranian story of wanting nuclear power for energy reasons is also plausible simply because it makes a lot of sense. It is true that Iran is swimming in oil, but they would rather be swimming in money, and the less oil they use at home, the more they can sell. They may very well have weapons as an underlying motive, but the cover story checks out, and didn’t we learn something about the wisdom of always leaping to the worst possible conclusion in Iraq?

Iíll take the opportunity to cut myself off at this point in case someone else wants to get a post in edgewise. Have a good weekend, all.

I also might as well refer to the comments of another female political figure, Golda Meir. She reportedly asserted that peace will only come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate the Israeli Jews. I will dare to say that the same holds true for the Islamic nihilists regarding the whole Western world. They hate us more than they love their own children.

I am aware of the fact that the Sunnis and Shiites do not, generally, get along. However, I am also aware of the fact that, generally, they are united in their hatred of us.

Do you disagree with that?

Another thing to think about is the fact that, while we were locked in our Cold War stalemate, we were not so confident of the logic of Mutual Assured Destruction. We did not necessarily go to bed all comfy, believing there was no chance the Soviet Union would go Armageddon on us.

And now, we can not be sure that Iran, or Al Qaeda would not use nuclear weapons.

In fact, Iranian mullahs have specifically threatened that they will use a nuke against Israel, and Bin Laden sought and received a Fatwa to kill two million Americans.

How do you think he plans on killing so many people?

And the bolshies would never align w/the nazis, what was Chamberain’s response when told again?

The commies had a domination wish, not a domination w/hundreds of millions expendable

martyr bantha poodu 72 raisin afterlife orders-from-allan mandate.

But then, if JFK didn’t blink in 62 – who knows what the commies would have done? We know what Castro urged them to do, then they realized they had a loose cannon.

You are applying semi-rational western, civilized thought/hope to a cult which is neither western, civilized nor (semi-) rational.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Both are true believing nihilists. this is all that matters. Only death and destruction satisfies their existential cravings. The Russian Communists were often nothing more than cynical fascists. They had every intention of living the good life. They enjoyed the best vodka and their beautiful dachas outside of Moscow. Their children were not going to be raised to eventually become suicide bombers.