"How did it come to pass that an opposition's measure of a president's foreign policy was all or nothing, success or "failure"? The answer is that the political absolutism now normal in Washington arrived at the moment--Nov. 7, 2000--that our politics subordinated even a war against terror to seizing the office of the presidency." - Daniel Henninger - WSJ 11/18/05
"the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts." - George Orwell

Sunday, January 15, 2006

CNN.com - Senators: Military last�option�on Iran - Jan 15, 2006

CNN.com - Senators: Military last option on Iran - Jan 15, 2006 TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Republican and Democratic U.S. lawmakers said Sunday there must be major immediate diplomatic action on Iran's nuclear activities, and that the option of military action cannot be taken off the table.

McCain - "The military option is the last option but cannot be taken off of the table."

As if Iraq's military option was not a "last" option.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat, said. "I don't think it's a stretch to say that, if the Iranians had a nuclear missile, that this president might well use it against Israel." She called the issue "the major test of the international community" and emphasized that the international community must be "unified, forceful and dramatic in its diplomacy."

Hopefully the international community will not fail this "major test," as was done with Iraq.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, told "Fox News Sunday" that the United States should work to win over those two nations.
"If we're going to put an economic stranglehold on Iran, which we should be doing -- it's preferable to military, any military option, and maybe more effective -- we need the Russians and Chinese.
"They need stuff from us. They need trade. They need all kinds of assistance. We ought to play hardball with them," he said. "And if President Bush were to do that, either publicly or privately, I think he'd get broad bipartisan backing."
No duh, where did this idiot come from? A lot of tough-guy talk with no indication regarding how we would go about changing the minds of Russia or China when business with Iran in in their economies' interest.

France is another one that should be noted, they have said the sanctions at this time is no good. The French are too busy with and intimidated by the reaction to their Muslim experiment within their own country to do anything but talk and balk at anything that might be constructive.

As the big talk is now just beginning after a year of negotiations by the EU3 where do we go? Did the 15 year clock as was necessary with Iraq begin with the EU3 negotiations or does it begin now? Did anyone truly expect anything of note coming from the EU3 process?

I believe we should push hard with the pro-democracy factions within Iran and support them overtly. If Iran does not begin complying with the demands of the Internation Community, they will be destroyed from within their own nation with our help. No pulling back after the suggestion as was done during Bush I and Iraq. If the nations involved really want to do something, they must be willing to stand up and not just talk a good line. They should use Iraq as an example of an opportunity they let pass. Unfortunately this will not likely be the case, since the story of Iraq has been lost to anti-Americanism and manipulation by the main stream media. Who knows what the truth is anymore.

Let the comedy begin.


© blogger templates 3 column | Webtalks