US considers use of nuclear weapons against Iran

Posted on April 8, 2006

Hat tip: Atlass Shrugs who points to a leftwing biased piece in the New Yorker
Atlass Shrugs quickly points out the leftwing jabs:

There are typical leftwing jabs in the article i.e.

“the real issue is who is going to control the Middle East and its oil in the next ten years.”

and sophmoric nonsense like

” speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

See what I mean? But peel away the partisan prattle and there is encouraging intel in there.

One of the military’s initial option plans, as presented to the White House by the Pentagon this winter, calls for the use of a bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites. One target is Iran’s main centrifuge plant, at Natanz, nearly two hundred miles south of Tehran. Natanz, which is no longer under I.A.E.A. safeguards, reportedly has underground floor space to hold fifty thousand centrifuges, and laboratories and workspaces buried approximately seventy-five feet beneath the surface.

If true, I, for one, think this it overdue. No, I am not a warmonger but I am not a denier either. I love my life and recognize when it is being threatened.

Apparently, U.S. undercover troops are in Iran collecting data and working to establish contacts with anti-government groups, and the Air Force is drawing up lists of targets, despite publicly advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons.

Lets get down to the grit of information in the article.

Robert Baer, who was a C.I.A. officer in the Middle East and elsewhere for two decades, told me that Ahmadinejad and his Revolutionary Guard colleagues in the Iranian government “are capable of making a bomb, hiding it, and launching it at Israel. They’re apocalyptic Shiites. If you’re sitting in Tel Aviv and you believe they’ve got nukes and missiles—you’ve got to take them out. These guys are nuts, and there’s no reason to back off.”

Under Ahmadinejad, the Revolutionary Guards have expanded their power base throughout the Iranian bureaucracy; by the end of January, they had replaced thousands of civil servants with their own members. One former senior United Nations official, who has extensive experience with Iran, depicted the turnover as “a white coup,” with ominous implications for the West. “Professionals in the Foreign Ministry are out; others are waiting to be kicked out,” he said. “We may be too late. These guys now believe that they are stronger than ever since the revolution.” He said that, particularly in consideration of China’s emergence as a superpower, Iran’s attitude was “To hell with the West. You can do as much as you like.”

Iran’s supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is considered by many experts to be in a stronger position than Ahmadinejad. “Ahmadinejad is not in control,” one European diplomat told me. “Power is diffuse in Iran. The Revolutionary Guards are among the key backers of the nuclear program, but, ultimately, I don’t think they are in charge of it. The Supreme Leader has the casting vote on the nuclear program, and the Guards will not take action without his approval.

The Pentagon adviser on the war on terror said that “allowing Iran to have the bomb is not on the table. We cannot have nukes being sent downstream to a terror network. It’s just too dangerous.”

Meanwhile, leftwinger blogs are ready to oppose this.

The truth is that the administration of George Bush has never wanted a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear crisis, at least not one short of complete capitulation by the Iranians, something that no analyst believes can or will happen. The Iraq war has certainly given pause to Mr. Bush and the neo-cons in and around his administration who want a piece of the Mullahs, but perversely as the situation deteriorates in Baghdad, it seems that Tehran is beginning to look like a good diversion. The IAEA chief, Mohammad El Baradei, despite U.S. urgings to the contrary, is visiting Iran next week to meet with Iranian leaders, still hoping to salvage a compromise deal. The U.S. would hardly object to Mr. El Baradei’s trip unless it wants all options to fail so that the one option left (which we constantly remind the Iranians is still on the table, not getting stale) will be war.

Imagining the unimaginable: America slept (or shopped) through the unimaginable Bush administration lies that took us to Iraq. We slept and shopped successively through Guantanamo, the horrors of Abu Ghraib, rendition, illegal detentions, the Valerie Plame leak, and most recently illegal wiretaps on U.S. citizens. We’re sleeping and shopping through administration claims that Iran is building weapons of mass destruction, the preposterous claim that Iran is supplying their Sunni arch-enemies al Qaeda with arms and bombs, that Iran is the world’s foremost sponsor of terrorism, and that Iran, if allowed the technology to manufacture nuclear fuel, will not only make nuclear weapons but use them against us or our allies (or just hand them over to terrorists who will). No proof required, and hey, there’s a sale on at Saks!

Preposterous claims eh? Maybe leftard pacifists are gullible enough to to believe a extreme theocratic nation that isn’t shy about its hatred of America, and loudly proclaimed that Israel should be wiped off the map, are only seeking nuclear capabilities for peaceful purposes. Perhaps they are naive enough to put all hope in diplomacy working with radical leaders that believe they are ushering in the Muslim messiah to rule the entire world under Islamic rule. I’m sure they have complete faith in Russia and China as well. However, some of us don’t feel so comfortable.

I have NO FAITH in the UN or the international community. They are paralyzed by corruption, moral inversion, and unending discourse. If they can’t save lives in Darfur, an unambiguous case of genocide, Iran is far far beyond their grasp. America must save the world, from itself, yet again. We need our peeps, our crew, our coalition - trusted allies that share our values, to get anything done.

Amen to that Pamela. One thing the lefties are correct about is that America needs to wake up, but it isn’t like they think. I for one, am glad that we have every option on the table right now. If it takes a few bunker buster nukes to penetrate where Iran is hiding their nuclear experiments, then by all means use them. The left crying like we are talking about another Hiroshima is not only an overexaggeration, but very revealing. Sadly, we can already see who the lefties will be rooting for. To the left, the real enemy is not radical extremists getting their hands on nuclear weapons! To them, the enemy is President Bush. We are pursuing diplomaticly, but it doesn’t hurt to have a plan B. If it ends up that Iran keeps playing games with us, and refusing to cooperate with the international community; and when the international community once again shows its uneffectiveness in dealing with the situation; its good to know we’ve got a plan in place to deal with ourself. And if it ends up that we can’t find anything afterwards, the only people to blame will be Iran. They are digging their own graves, and if they don’t wake up out of their little apocolypse dream, we will have to give them a wake-up call.

Dr. Sanity has a song about it.
Riel World View talks about how deceptive the headlines are.

More excellent reads on the topic at Wizbanghere and here

» Filed Under News, War On Terror

Trackback URL

Comments

One Response to “US considers use of nuclear weapons against Iran”

LomaAlta on April 8th, 2006 6:33 pm

To do less than have a workable plan in place is gross negligence.
At some point, rational, patriotic leaders will have to make an assessment of when doing nothing poses a significantly greater risk to America and our allies than does attacking Iran’s nuclear capabilities. When that point is crossed it is our national command authorities duty to remove the threat to the best of their ability.