Obama Continues to Appease Iran

Appeasing Iran

A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

If the President of the US sits down, in a face to face meeting with the President of Iran, and discusses Iran’s attempt to develop an Atomic Bomb, discusses Iran’s meddling in Iraq… including the training and supplying of insurgents in Iraq who are killing America military personnel, discusses Iran’s declared intention of wiping Israel from the map, discusses Iran’s threatening of shipping through the Straits of Hormuz, discusses Iran’s arming and training of terrorists in Gaza and Lebanon and sundry other places around the globe, … would that be appeasement ?

Of COURSE it would be appeasement! Why? Because… it would raise Iran’s President up to the level of the US President in perceived prestige and power around the world (I mean, of course, the “OFFICE” of the President). Plus, it would embolden the terrorist organizations that would read it as “bringing the US to heel”.

There is nothing to discuss with Iran. We have demands to make, but there is nothing to discuss.

Look, Iran is skating on very thin ice. Their arrogance is either covering for their stupidity, or a national death wish. Either way the life of their country is in the balance.

Iran is setting itself up for a preemptory military strike by Israel… or the United States, or (most likely), both.

The fact that the US has been fighting a ground war against Iran, for many months now, is not lost on the intelligence communities of Israel, Great Britain and the United States. Although it has not been spoken of by the press in the US, to any great degree, the British press printed the facts about the 12,000 man Iranian force which flooded across the Iraq/Iran border shortly after the US and British Invasion of Iraq. It is certainly a contributing factor in the continuing battle to knock down the so-called “Insurgency” within Iraq.

The plain fact is, folks, we are fighting Iran on the ground, and all over the world right now. If the troops we are fighting against aren’t Iranian in blood, then they are Iranian by proxy.

Iran has a huge bulls eye painted on her today. If the people of Iran do not rise up and overthrow the mullahs and the Imams and whoever is running that pitiful excuse for a country then they can expect to be attacked by outside forces and their regime changed by force. Iran’s hand is raised toward every man and every man’s hand is raised toward Iran.

Iran’s leadership continues to boast of going after Israel. It is the worst mistake they could possibly make.

Israel has a first, and second, strike nuclear capability. She has nuclear-armed subs, at sea, as a back up to her ground based nuclear arsenal. If attacked, she will certainly strike back and… she has the capability to take out the entire metropolitan population of Iran a number of times over.

For many years, now, Israel has warned that she will use her nuclear option rather than be the recipients of another holocaust. Israel is not just whistling Dixie. She will do it as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow.

Iran finds a democratic Iraq unacceptable as a neighbor. Therefore, they intend to do, and are doing, anything within their power to cripple all efforts to establish such a government in Iraq. In the meantime, their effort to create a nuclear bomb, missiles, etc, is on track and is due to be realized well before the ten years our misled intelligence services led themselves to believe several years ago.

All of this we know. And some in our government want to negotiate??? Some of our presidential candidates want to TALK to Iran? At this point, talking is nothing more than a sign of weakness. On the other hand, if Iran wishes to send an emissary, through back channels, to talk to OUR people in search of a way to save their own behinds, well, that is a different story. We might entertain an offer from Iran to lay down here arms, remove her troops from Iraq, back away from the Straits of Hormuz, stop threatening the free flow of oil from the Middle East, cut off funding and supplying terrorists in Gaza and Lebanon and the other trouble spots around the globe, and basically, behaving themselves… then, we might be open to listening.

But, as long as Iran’s mad mullahs and hallucinating henchmen continue to prance and preen, shine their shields and rattle their sabers, any attempt, on the part of the US (or any other nation at which their vitriol is directed) to talk with them is viewed as appeasement… and rightly so.

Since the beginning of warfare between tribes there has always been those who want to try talking to the enemy tribe in an attempt avoiding open combat. They are, inevitably, the weakest members of the threatened tribe. Unfortunately, it is their protestations that “peace at any price” has cost more lives, in the long run, than would have been lost had the battle begun immediately and ended quickly with one tribe, or the other, wining decisively.

Appeasement does two things: It demonstrates the appeasing side’s weakness and fear and it allows the threatening side to grow stronger and bolder and even more determined to put the pip-squeak nation, begging for peace out of it’s misery.

Even inferring that one might talk to Iran, if one were in a position of power from which to do so, does the nation a disservice. It demonstrates the naiveté, the inexperience, and the lack of security in one’s ability to lead a nation of free people who went to war against a world superpower to gain their freedom and have fought ever since to maintain their freedom.

A great nation does not negotiate peace with another nation threatening war against it. A great nation swats the offending nation, as one would a fly, then dictates the terms of peace to THEM. Great leaders understand that. “Pretenders to Greatness” have never understood that. History records great nations and great leaders. Pretenders to greatness MAY gain mention in the footnotes of history.

So, as our diplomatic elite urge appeasement of Iran by “talking” understand they are not representative of the vast majority of the American people who had much rather act as men, standing on their feet in defense of their nation, than as weaklings on their knees, exposing their necks to the sword of the enemy.

Courage begets greatness. Fear begets timidity. Timidity gives birth to acts of appeasement. There is no place for timidity in the Office of the President of the United States.

J. D. Longstreet

How I Learned to Love the Bomb ... Alan Caruba

How I Learned to Love the Bomb
By Alan Caruba

As a child in the 1950s, I learned how to “duck and cover” in order to protect myself from an atomic bomb explosion. Little did I know that the instruction should have been “Kiss your asterisk goodbye.”

The Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, when the Soviets wanted to put nuclear-tipped long range missiles there, led to a confrontation between President John F. Kennedy and Nikita Krushchev that had both sides changing their underwear after it was over.

What do the United States, Great Britain, France, Russia, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea in common? They all have nuclear weapons and, of course, Iran has been working toward that goal and is now very close to achieving it.

Some will argue that Israel should not be on the list because it has never acknowledged its nuclear capabilities, but everyone knows they have them. Presumably the Iranian mullahs do as well, but they are a bunch of nuts waiting for the mythical Twelfth Imam to come out of a well and smite the enemies of Islam.

It is instructive that both Pakistan and India acquired their nuclear weapons without anyone being aware of it until after the fact. At CIA headquarters, when India announced its successful test, it came as a very big surprise. These days, the U.S. is busy reassuring Israel that Iran is “at least a year away” from nuclear status and you can imagine how relieved they are to hear that.

North Korea is a wild card and, given the lack of success the U.S. and anyone else has had to get them to abandon their nukes, the same can be assumed for Iran when they make their announcement. Meanwhile they have to content themselves with announcing new missiles, the latest of which they dubbed “the ambassador of death.”

The Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization has designated Sunday, August 29, as “The International Day against Nuclear Tests.” Given the total lack of success in thwarting any nation that wants a nuke, my confidence in the United Nations’ treaty is zero.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN component, has been kicked out of North Korea, Iraq and Iran on several occasions, so one might rationally assume it is useless when it comes to stopping the manufacture of A-bombs.

Olli Heinonen, the former chief of UN nuclear inspections worldwide, told Le Monde, a French newspaper, that Iran has stockpiled enough low-enriched uranium for 1-2 nuclear arms, but he thought doing so made no sense. Betting on the rationality of the Iranian ayatollahs is not a good idea.

Who doesn’t want a ban on nuclear weapons testing? The United States Senate for one.

While the U.S. has “signed” a number of the test ban treaties that have been around since the 1960s, the Senate has not ratified any of them, thus avoiding having to commit the nation to no longer testing new nuclear weapons. For some reason, the U.S. Senate does not trust Russia or the other nuke nations.

In April, our ever-hopeful President Barack Obama journeyed to Russia to sign a nuclear arms reduction treaty with Dmitry Medvedev dubbed “New Start.” For Obama it was another empty photo opportunity on a par with accepting the Nobel Peace Prize (soon to be available everywhere in boxes of Cracker Jack). For the Russians it was a reason to break out the vodka.

Robert R. Monroe, a retired vice admiral in the U.S. Navy and former director of the Defense Nuclear Agency from 1977-1980 explains why. “The treaty has many problems from being unverifiable to giving Russia virtual veto power over U.S. missile defense, and more.” That’s bad enough, but it’s worse than that.

Two days before meeting with the Russians, the Obama administration released its Nuclear Posture Review (NPR). Monroe says, “The NPR is joined at the hip with New Start, and together they take this country down a dangerous path. For 65 years, the very existence of our nation has depended upon a strong nuclear deterrent. The new NPR wipes out this proven policy, substituting one of weakness in its place.”

Liberals love test ban treaties. They love the idea of unilaterally disarming the United States in a world where there are nations who may not love us.

Not surprisingly, the nations with nukes have not signed onto anything that would take away their deterrent factor and, of course, Iran is hell-bent on getting them for itself.

Not a single conflict since the U.S. dropped two A-bombs on Japan in 1945 to end a war they started has used nuclear weapons. Rational people, even if they have nuclear weapons know that using them is probably suicidal. Irrational people like the Iranian ayatollahs are probably the exception.

Alan Caruba blogs daily at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/. An author, business and science writer, he is the founder of The National Anxiety Center.

(c) Alan Caruba, 2010