Have a look at Steve Schippert’s excellent diatribe on the latest lawyerly dithering by the Bush Administration on how much to tell the American people about Iran’s ongoing war against us and our friends in the Middle East.
He describes the White House deep thinkers as living in an alternate universe, which is certainly true. Over the past several years, the American Government has gathered a mountain of evidence about Iran’s role in the Iraqi “insurgency,” documenting Iran’s support for both sides of various ethnic and sectarian battles. The recent arrests of top Iranian military leaders, along with materials found in their computers and their satchels, amazed many of our diplomats (some of whom called the information a “bombshell”) and led our military in the field to insist, at long last, that the American public be informed of the nature of the enemy.
Our military leaders should have insisted on this a long time ago, for they have had the evidence, even before they nailed down the Iranian provenance of the shaped explosives that first surfaced in the Gaza Strip in use against Israeli tractors. The military knew–at least 18 months ago–that these weapons, by far the leading cause of American casualties in Iraq, were manufactured in Iran. And both American and Iraqi military intelligence knew that the Iranians were running the smuggling operations that brought the weapons into Iraq. The Marines captured documents and photographs that showed terrorists from Iraq were in Damascus, meeting with Syrian and Iranian military officers.
It requires an act of faith to believe that the Iranians are not a major force in the terror war in the full theater of combat, from Gaza and the West Bank, to Iraq, Lebanon, and Somalia.
Yet the Administration dithers. Shall we release this information or not? If so, how shall we release it? And where? Should our military in the field release it, or should the president do it?
This embarrassing debate of course is framed by the recent “intelligence failure” over WMDs in Iraq. I put the two words in quotes because we have found hundreds of shells containing sarin in Iraq–WMDs of the first order–and an Iraqi program in place that could have resumed manufacture of chemical and biological weapons within days of an order from Saddam. Not to mention the still unexamined possibility that WMDs were smuggled out of Iraq just before, and just after, our invasion. And I put the two words in quotes because the White House itself, in the person of Steve Hadley (a distinguished attorney and an honest man), apologized for “improperly” permiting the president to pronounce the infamous sixteen words that simply and correctly stated that British Intelligence believed that Saddam had attempted to optain fissionable material in Africa. The words were true, and the apology remains inexplicable.
The embarrassing debate–not the national debate, mind you, but the one within the Administration–also reflects the total failure of this Administration to craft an Iran strategy. You might have thought that six-plus years were sufficient, but no. We still drift through our alternate universe, hotly debating whether, when and where to release information whose import, as Schippert so rightly says, “everybody knows.” For we all know what Iran is up to. The question is whether we are going to fight back.
With these many article more or less against US in the media, I wonder how Pentagon can effectively deals with the problems in the Middle East.
Take the situation in regards to Iran.
Ever wonder why Khomeinists and other Islamists are so disrespectful toward US and civilization. They take their clues form the European media who are totally against US, while their whole survival depends on US. Just notice as demonstrated below, how LeftOver Marxists and SociNazis in Europe and US have ganged together against US.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/02/07/do0702.xml
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/united_states/article1336313.ece
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-weiss5feb05,0,4991100.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrail
http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8655676&top_story=1
AP Report of junkies in UK:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359782481&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/04/wiran04.xml
Sunday Times:
http://iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2007&m=02&d=04&a=3
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2004169,00.html
The question is not whether “we are going to fight back.”
The question is whether we are going to destroy them.
We’re in a war with Iran.
We should be seizing upon the slightest predicate or excuse to close with them with everything we have. We should be looking for excuses to pound them thoroughly.
This encompasses far more than an absence of policy.
This involves FUNDAMENTAL, NON-NEGOTIABLE American honour.
This is a thing of honour now.
Every hour of every day that we do NOT unload upon them, disgraces us the more, dishonours us the more, validates the contempt, the PROPER contempt our enemies throughout islam have for us.
George W. Bush’s message of American strength is warping into one of American weakness. The very point of the tutorial that we supposedly inflicted by going to Baghdad is being completely undone.
I enjoyed that line about it “requiring an act of faith” to continue to profess that Iran has nothing to do with the mayhem racking Iraq presently.
THAT was a beautiful line. You need to hammer that one home. Use it often, use it well. For the people in the White House who are scrambling about avoiding mentioning Tehran can be mortified by your use of that phrase. It places their policy in such a squalid light as to shame them. And such men can be shamed.
Persuasion has failed. So try shame.
That’s why I relentlessly focus on American honour.
Democrats are impervious to claims of honour, but not so the Grand Old Party.
So use that.
The White House policy isn’t simply one of dither. For they’ve made up their mind. They haven’t any intention of tangling with Tehran, REGARDLESS of how many Americans get blown up, get maimed, get disfigured.
There’s very little time left for this President to remain in office. If he hasn’t seized upon the evidence to take on Iran heretofore, he won’t hereinafter.
Whatever appetite he ever had to kill our enemies, and let’s be blunt, he didn’t have much to begin with, is gone now.
But perhaps the recollection of fundamental American honour can revive his lost awareness of himself, his lost awareness of the dignity and power of the office he holds.
Perhaps recollections of honour can restore his lost manhood. For we’ve got an emasculated man as Commander-in-Chief right now.
Oh, by the way, I loved that article you wrote about Bobby Knight. That was great.
You might consider a similar piece about the recently retired Coach of the Cowboys, Bill Parcells.
You may wish to consider approaching a Senator with your ideas. There is an off-chance a legislator may agree with you and put Iran’s behavior on the national agenda.
Although the executive branch of government conducts America’s foreign policy, Congress (and especially the Senate) sets the general parameters of our foreign policy. And it is a rare President who can set the national agenda during the last two years of his tenure.
ML:
There used to be a legislator who “got it” on these matters, a very great legislator named Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania. He was defeated in a landslide by an empty suit named Casey.
The other one who gets it is Senator Coburn from Oklahoma, who has been kind enough to have me testify in the past. And I do talk to him. But I don’t believe there is enough critical mass in the Congress to initiate effective policy toward Iran. Quite the contrary, in fact; look at the Democratic candidates who warned Bush about attacking Iran…
Yesterday, http://www.iranews.org, one of the many mullahs’ news agencies had an interview with “MohammadNabi Roodaki” , the vice chairman of the ” Security and Foreign Policy Committee” of Iran’s Parliament.
He openly says : ” US should release our diplomats as soon as possible because otherwise it is possible that US diplomats are abducted in Iraq.”
He further adds: ” Youngsters and people of Iraq have so far controlled their wrath for the killings and daily explosions but the US should not do anything to make young sunni and shiites to confront the US and should be afraid of the day the Iraqi young people take guns because then the US should take back the corps of its soldiers to America.”
I think this clear warning / confession will also be ignored by the US administration. To tell you the truth I hope it does not make them trembling out of fear and decide that let’s be friendly with mullahs and beg their mercy.
God bless Neocons!
By the way, what happened to Mr Khalilzad who had promised to disclose the important info on Iran’s meddling in Iraq last Wednesday?
ML:
Good question. I suppose he’s furious, don’t you?
What is your comment on the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, which does not assign a major role in the widespread sectarian violence and insurgency there to Iran?
ML:
That’s exactly what Steve Schippers was talking about, in fact. Note that there is a division within the Intel Community, not everyone bought into the alternate universe.