The Hawks and The Doves

International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran is still "at least a few years away'' from being able to build a nuclear bomb, and "there is still time for sanctions to work." Senator John McCain of Arizona "singled out Europe for criticism, saying "Major European financial institutions are giving lines of credit to the Iranians.'' The Hawks and Doves can't agree on what needs to be done to stop Iran, so Iran continues on their path. America and Israel are left to act independently.

And fearless are the idiots -- Among the hawks and doves

American sanctions are having an impact on Iran financially, but is it enough? The Bush administration seems to be firm that Iran will not be allowed to have nuclear weapons, that we will act to prevent that from happening. Israel has proven that they will also step up when a nuclear threat faces them -- example, Syria.

The debate has come to "will we STOP Iran, or will we debate what to do AFTER Iran goes nuclear and actually ACTS on their promised intentions."

Here in Washington D.C., debate about Iran is dominant. Unlike the debate that preceded the invasion of Iraq, this one features a much greater emphasis on what happens after striking as many as 20 Iranian nuclear sites. Ergo, lessons have been learned.

The hawkish argument is pretty simple: If you delay Iran's production of an indigenous weapon for decades, you will not only protect Israel from a future horror, but you will also send a categorical message to other proliferators that there will be consequences for defying the United States. It is an argument about the future.

The dovish argument is about the day after. It is an argument over what happens immediately, and how catastrophic the consequences will be in the months after a unilateral aerial assault. With the Iranian street aflame, will Iran send its conventional forces across the Iraq border to engage the U.S. forces in formal warfare, even as they are fully engaged in fighting the insurgency? Will Iraq succeed in disrupting tanker traffic through the Straits of Hormuz, pushing world oil prices to $150 a barrel? Will Iran endeavor to engage Israel directly rather than through its surrogate Hezbollah? (NorthStarWriters)

The dovish argument is unacceptable to me. How much is that nuclear bomb in the window?, Survive A Nuke Attack -- Thinking About the Unthinkable: How to Survive a Nuclear Bomb:

I scratch my head over the mainstream press when they debate whether Iran will get the bomb in two years or five years or 10 years. They’ve missed the big story: Nuclear bombs are available on the black market today!

The former Russian Security Council secretary, Alexander Lebed, said in an interview on 60 Minutes on September 9, 1997, that more than 100 suitcase nukes are missing from the breakup of the Soviet Union. [snip]

“The danger posed by unsecured nuclear material is not just a Russian problem. Enough civilian plutonium for many nuclear weapons exists in Germany, Belgium, Japan, and Switzerland, and some 20 tons of civilian highly enriched uranium exists at 345 operational and shut down civilian research facilities in 58 countries, sometimes in quantities large enough to make a bomb.” (more)

Looking at what is going on around the world is not enough, we must look at what is happening in our own country. Decisions we make daily can, and are, making us less safe, less secure, in my humble opinion. "Islam In The Heartland", Ari Kaufman, via Pat Dollard

It then may come as little surprise then, that the city of Plainfield, just west of Indianapolis, is home to the Islamic Center of North America, which, according to their mission, “has served the Muslims of this continent for well over forty years.”

The entire continent. And it’s based in “The Heartland.” As is Dearborn.

What’s next? Accommodating Islam—-and Islam only—-at the local airport? [snip]

The ICLU is nowhere to be found on the religious aspect of the airport sinks matter. Last seen, they and their legal director, Ken Falk, were assisting The American Atheists in removing any semblance of religion from small towns in Indiana and suing the state over the “In God We Trust” license plates issued by the Indiana BMV earlier this year. These innocuous matters apparently make the litigation agenda, not sectarian sinks in a major airport.

Preventive action is a must. Being prepared for the unthinkable is equally important. However, if we PREVENT the action from happening, we won't have to worry about the UNTHINKABLE.

Other reading:
An Open Letter To Young Would Be Martyrs..., 123Beta
Mos–ques have Terrorists?..Who Knew!, Woman Honor Thyself
Vets for Freedom reaching out to spread good news, Rosemary's Thoughts
_______________________________________________________________________
Trackposted to Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, , The Populist, DragonLady's World, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Big Dog's Weblog, Adeline and Hazel, Nuke's, third world county, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Dumb Ox Daily News, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Comments

[KAK]

The Crucades were 11th to 13th century, let's let them lie there. This country was based on religious freedom as guaranteed in our constitution, it's accomodating to ALL religions.

[KAK]

I have to disagree with you. This preemptive policy of military action is unwise in a day when corporations and the military industrial complex weild the power in these modern United States.

Yes the hawkish argument is pretty simple. If nuclear armament is available on the black market, what good does our bombing Iran do? It unleashes guaranteed retaliation in the moment and who knows where the price of oil will skyrocket. . America right now is in trouble, people are loosing their houses, vets aren't being taken care of, govt programs are being cut back, health care is in a shambles, the military is almost broken, your rights and freedoms are disappearing the list goes on and on. You must have a healthy income because you are not thinking like a concerned mother with children who will be facing the consequences in a country where a healthy income is eluding more and more families. Get real, yes the consequences of $150 per Gallon of oil is real fear to be dealt with by those of us without bottomless bank accounts.

Why should we worry about Iran's threats, we worried about Sadams and look at where we are. The country's broke girl, get real. Let them threaten all they want they are not stupid they too know the retaliation to be thrown upon them for a nuclear or other attack. This country is in trouble and it's time to pay attention to what is going on here at home.
We are becoming the aggressors, please see that. Unfortunately our Idiot-in Chief fell for Sadams bluff lets not fall for Irans and be the worlds fool two times over, enough is enough.

Bush did more damage to this country then al-Qaeda and it's nineteen fanatics ever could have and you want a repeat performance. Quit thinking and acting in this aura of fear that this administration has placed on our shoulders. God help us all.

KAK

[Roger W. Gardner]

When a bully is threatening you, you can try to walk away. But sometimes he follows you. You can give up and submit, but your treatment will probably only get worse.
It's almost a given that if you resist, you will escalate the violence.

There are innumerable unknowns when it comes to what might happen in the aftermath of an attack on Iran's nuclear and air defense systems by the West. The Iranian people could indeed rally around their Mullahs. The streets throughout the Middle East could explode in rage.

So what?

There is a large segment of that Muslim population in that hell-hole of the Middle East who will find a way to hate us no matter what we do or don't do.

And if the Iranians make the monumental mistake of siding with their murderous clerics in opposing the West, so be it.

In my opinion, no possible scenario, no matter how scary, comes close to having to live in a world with an Iranian Nuclear Power. Driven as they are by an implaccable religious zeal, they will not allow themselves to be bought off, as with North Korea and to some extent Pakistan has. They have already let us know that they are perfectly willing to sacrifice MILLIONS of their own people in order to achieve their dream of total hegemony of the Middle East by the use of nuclear blackmail and intimidation.

Whenever you fight back you run a risk. In this case, however, the risk of allowing Iran to acquire a nuclear weapons capability is an unacceptable risk.

Contrary to ruining our image in this part of the world, a strong violent strike could very well produce just the opposite effect. We would quickly be percieved as the Strong Horse, they would take notice and be respectful of our awesome might.

There are times -- and I believe that this is one such time, when courage is the only answer.

[michael]

--It would be Israel in Iran's sites before it would be the U.S--
--

Correct, but as long Iran does not have nukes, they can't launch an existential strike on Israel.

They could launch proxy wars through Syria, Hezbollah, or Hamas, but the IDF can take any of them on and win.

They could launch a missile strike, either conventional or gas, but the IDF has a working anti-ballistic missile system.

However, in the aftermath of an American strike, would Iran have the command and control to do any of that?

[Debbie]

Michael: It would be Israel in Iran's sites before it would be the U.S. All you say is true. Iran is already killing Americans in Iraq. You say, "The "day after" an Iran strike shouldn't be a US debate, because it's not a US problem. It's an Iranian problem. The US problem would be Iranian nukes." That's correct.

[michael]

--With the Iranian street aflame, will Iran send its conventional forces across the Iraq border to engage the U.S. forces in formal warfare, even as they are fully engaged in fighting the insurgency? Will Iran succeed in disrupting tanker traffic through the Straits of Hormuz, pushing world oil prices to $150 a barrel? Will Iran endeavor to engage Israel directly rather than through its surrogate Hezbollah?--

The real problem is that the US hasn't bombed Iran's nuke sites yet.

The above are the most likely Iranian retaliations, and none are lethal to the US or US interests...

If the Iranians attack the US in Iraq with open warfare, there's no doubt that the US Army will win the encounter.

If Iran tries to close the Strait of Hormuz, there is no doubt that the US Navy can reopen it.

If Iran tries to attack Israel directly, it would be by missile, and the point to all of this is that Iran lacks nukes (which would gaurantee their swift victory) at this time. And Israel has a working anti-ballistic missile system. In addition, the US forces in Iraq would not stand idly by in this scenario.

The "day after" an Iran strike shouldn't be a US debate, because it's not a US problem. It's an Iranian problem. The US problem would be Iranian nukes.

[Debbie]

Rastaman: Done deal is right, and this is not the only place this is going on. On college campuses we have the sinks, we also have special prayer rooms, etc.

[Rastaman]

GOOOD GRIEF! I just checked it out and those sinks are already a done deal. Man oh man. Inch by inch.

Rasta

[Rastaman]

I've gone in circles several times over what may or may not happen with Iran. The problem is that no one makes unequivocal statements and the things they hint at keep being revised. That Irans nuclear ambitions should be squelched and the present regime removed are givens. Whether anything will actually happen, and what, is a guess.

As to putting in special muslim sinks in airports, I'll believe it when I see it. Airport administrators aren't stupid and if they actually did that, then they'd have to start making special concessions for every religious and minority group, and they know it.

Rasta