Next Stop Iran
Spengler has some interesting thoughts:
“Americans are a misunderstood people. … President Bush earned overwhelming support by toppling Saddam Hussein, a caricature villain who appeared to threaten Americans, but earned opprobrium by committing American lives to the political rehabilitation of
, about which Americans care little. … Iraq
The Revolutionary Guards of 1979 now are middle-aged men who now at last have a chance to lead. … But
's motives for acquiring nuclear power are not only economic but strategic. Like [Adolf] Hitler and [Josef] Stalin, Ahmadinejad looks to imperial expansion as a solution for economic crisis at home … envisages a regional Shi'ite empire backed by nuclear weaponry. … Iran
If conflict with
is indeed unavoidable, the Bush administration can re-emerge as a war government rather than as Wilsonian nation-builders, with every expectation of popular support.” Iran
He predicts President Bush will take action before November. He is not alone. This from the
“It is believed that an American-led attack, designed to destroy Iran's ability to develop a nuclear bomb, is ‘inevitable’ if Teheran's leaders fail to comply with United Nations demands to freeze their uranium enrichment” program.
Update1: “We need to attack Iran, not just to keep it from developing nuclear weapons, but to topple the largest remaining state sponsor of terrorism, and to discredit Islamic rule. … Everywhere you look in the Middle East … who is the biggest threat to America's interests, you will find the same answer—Hamas in the Palestinian territories, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Assad regime in Syria, al-Qaeda and the Shiite militias in Iraq—Iran is supporting them all. This is the real war, and it's time we started fighting it.” Robert Tracinski (link unavailable.)
Update2: “Iran, of course, secure now behind its nuclear wall, will surely step up its campaign of terror around the world. It will become even more of a magnet and haven for terrorists. The terror training grounds of Afghanistan were always vulnerable if the West had the resolve. Protected by a nuclear-missile-owning state, Iranian camps will become impregnable” –Gerard Baker, The Times.
Update4: "In fact the United States and Iran have been in a state of war since November 4, 1979. The taking of a nation's embassy is usually interpreted as such under the international law that liberals hold in such high regard. Since that time Iran has waged war upon not just America but also infidels in general." - Grant Jones, the Dougout.
Update5: "You say it is unacceptable to choose between such alternatives. There must be a moderate, middle way to oppose Iranian nukes. What about diplomacy? sanctions? confidence- and security-building measures? The short answer is no. You are simply postponing the real choices, and effectively choosing something worse than either. …" - Angelo Codevilla
Update6: "All that has changed in the past six months is the growing Western realization that radical Islam thrives on appeasement, and really does mean what it says. … Far from withdrawing his pledge to wipe Israel out, President Ahmadinejad doubled-down on the boast by organizing formal Holocaust-denial conferences, the prerequisite for any Jew-hater who wishes to move from rhetoric to action. Unlike Hitler, however, Ahmadinejad outlined in advance not merely the intent but the method of his intended follow-up to the Holocaust …" - Victor Davis Hanson, Symposium on Iran.
Update7: "Iran intends to move toward large-scale uranium enrichment involving 54,000 centrifuges, the country's deputy nuclear chief said Wednesday, signaling its resolve to expand a program the international community has insisted it halt." - AP wire "If Iran can get 3,000 centrifuges on line by the end of 2006 and is otherwise ready to build its first bomb, it could have a nuclear weapon by this time next year." - Tiger Hawk