Hillary Clinton acknowledged this week what anyone with eyes and a high school freshman’s intellect has known since she took office as Secretary of State in January. Negotiations with Iran in their quest for a nuclear weapon haven’t worked. “I don’t think anyone can doubt that our outreach has produced very little in terms of any kind of a positive response from the Iranians,” the Secretary said in a statement to the national media.
All this while the “What Me Worry,” president logs frequent flyer miles, bowing to third-rate potentates, sucking up to South American strong men, and basking in the adoring accolades of Euro Lefties.
Not only have negotiations and sanctions not worked, they may have helped the Islamist state develop the technology they need to complete the Bomb. In a recent interview with the Washington Post, Ali Soltanieh, Iran’s representative to the IAEA in Vienna, said, “We should thank the Americans for sanctions, because they have united our country.” And indeed Iran is moving forward at dizzying speed in accomplishing their goal.
The revelation highlights an even larger concern: The threat of a nuclear Middle East, a threat made worse by administrations of both major U.S. political parties for 20 years. Most recently the U.S. has given Pakistan more than $10 billion to buy their cooperation in our war against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, some of which has almost certainly gone toward Pakistan’s rapidly expanding nuclear weapons program.
U.S. leaders have not yet learned that cooperation cannot be purchased without the risk of creating disastrous and often greater consequences in the future than currently exist. Pakistan is not Nicaragua, where we for years promoted U.S. interests, by supporting the Somoza regime and later the Contra’s, when Somoza lost power to the Sandinistas. Pakistan posses a very real threat of becoming an extremist Muslim state, should Obama play true to form and screw up in our war against radical Islamists, and it will be a Nuclear state.
The fundamental problem in our “war on terror” is reflected in the nom guerre itself. Obama, as with Clinton and both Bushes before him, fails to recognize the mission. We are not on the verge of World War III, we a re in it. Our war is with Islam. Period.
We have always been at war with terror, but we are now at war with a religion. I thought that Bush understood that in October 2001, when he met with Vladimir Putin and arranged the lifting of the ban on tactical nukes in Afghanistan. I was wrong.
During the bombing of Dresden in February 1945, allied air forces incinerated the city, killing an estimated 25,000 civilians alone. Brutal, yes, but one does not win a war by killing ones enemy’s army alone; wars are won by disrupting the lives of the civilians that support that army, a fact well known by Osama bin Laden.
Not that Bush should have needed Putin’s permission, but the President blew it big time in Afghanistan; in using tac nukes in Tora Bora he could have cut off the head of al Qaeda’s leadership and saved hundreds of American lives.
Our dilemma in Iran should not be a great one; the answer is simple, albeit distasteful. If we do not implement a surgical preemptive strike on Iran now, we force Israel — our only true ally in the Middle East — into the untenable position of doing it. If the strike requires the use of tac nukes we must do it. God rest the souls of the innocent, but we must act before Iran does, because Iran will use any weapon they have to destroy us.