Saturday, April 15, 2006

Confronting Iran - Los Angeles Times

Confronting Iran - Los Angeles Times

Confronting Iran
Will we learn from our mistakes and apply tough diplomacy -- or rely once again on the failed doctrine of preemption?

By Dianne Feinstein, DIANNE FEINSTEIN is California's senior U.S. senator.
April 15, 2006

TEHRAN THIS WEEK claimed that it had enriched uranium, a first step toward nuclear weapons capability. The question now is whether the Bush administration has learned from its mistakes in Iraq, or will it set our nation on a road that leads to military confrontation with Iran? Or will we follow the Democrats and wait till there is a Mushroom Cloud over Israel or one of OUR major Cities?

No one concerned about U.S. national security wants Iran to obtain a nuclear weapons capability. It would be a destabilizing force in the Middle East and throughout the world. That's exactly why we need strong American leadership, working toward a verifiable diplomatic solution. Yeah just like the one Bill Clinton, Madeline Alldull, and Grits Carter put together for N. Korea.

Instead, the administration reportedly is intent upon relying on the failed doctrine of preemption and new Pentagon planning that stokes the prospect of military conflict. If this is true, Americans ought to be deeply concerned. Yes DEEPLY CONCERNED that lunatics like Feinstien & Joe me want to be Prez Biden along with the rest of the bedbugs in the Democrat party cause us to NOT take this Lunatic Imamadjihad at his word, as he has repeatedly said he will attack both Israel and the U.S.

The doctrine of preemption, first articulated by President Bush at West Point in June 2002, was spelled out in the September 2002 National Security Strategy: "The greater the threat, the greater the risk of inaction — and the more compelling the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves." Which is exactly why we should be Bombing Iran NOW not after they use their Nukes on us or the Jews.

Just a few weeks ago, the doctrine was reiterated in the latest National Security Strategy. According to this document, the U.S. may use force before it is attacked because the nation cannot afford to "stand idly by as grave dangers materialize." Yet it is the doctrine itself that is dangerous. NO Senator it is STUPIDITY like yours that is DANGEROUS. We CAN NOT wait till a nuke is set off and then react. Your not only STUPID your an ASS.

First, it demands that our intelligence be right — every time. This is difficult, if not impossible, in the shadowy world of terrorism and WMD. As we've seen in Iraq, intelligence not only can be wrong, it can be manipulated. Our nation's credibility and stature have taken a huge hit as a result, and the U.S. is in no position to garner support in the international community for military confrontation based on preemption. Our INTELLIGENCE was CORRECT on Iraq the FACTS have PROVEN IT. The fact that your still trying to deny that only reafirms your level of STUPIDITY. I guess the IRANIANS dancing in the street while holding viles of REFINED WEAPONS GRADE URANIUM in their hands being broadcast by IRANIAN television is now faulty intelligence also. The only one whose credibility is at question is yours and your colleagues.

Second, the doctrine of preemption may lead to a less stable world in general — especially if our adversaries believe they are safe from preemptive action only if they possess nuclear weapons. Iran has no doubt noted the difference in our dealings with North Korea, which possesses nuclear weapons, and Iraq, which the administration believed was still developing them. So the administration may have encouraged the very proliferation it is seeking to prevent. Yes as I said we have to pay a HEAVY price for allowing the DEMOCRATS to deal with N. Korea and using their MONITORING PLAN as a means to stop them from acquiringing the Bomb. Along with IAEA and the super power the UN.

Third, an overreliance on preemption can lead to the downplaying of diplomacy. By the administration's own account, Iran is years away from possessing nuclear weapons; there is time to engage in forceful diplomatic action. The British, The French, and The Germans, have been using DIPLOMACY for 3 years and what did it get them Iran 2 months ago told them to F Off they were going to refine Uranium any way. Not to mention that it only took the U.S. 4 years to develop a Bomb back in the 40s when it had NEVER been done before. Iran is a very advanced Country in the technicalcle sciences. Not to mention the IAEA your monitoring dream team already found Iran to be possession of the plans for a Nuke warhead of Russian design and of course they gave it back to them when the Iranians asked for it. Add to that AQ Kahns information that he sold them plus all the equipment from France and Russia only an ASSHOLE would think that it would take years instead of months to build o bomb once they posses the FUEL you idiot.

The dangers inherent in preemptive action are only multiplied by reports that the administration may be considering first use of tactical, battlefield nuclear weapons in Iran: Specifically, nuclear "bunker busters" to try to take out deeply buried targets. Bunker Busters AREN'T NUCLEAR they're conventional you retard, We used them to destroy Mountains Afghanistantan and the STORY about the Administrations plans to use Nukes was a fairy tale created by another IDIOT Seeless Hersh.

There are some in this administration who have been pushing to make nuclear weapons more "usable." They see nuclear weapons as an extension of conventional weapons. This is pure folly. Name names Senator or is it you don't have any to back this statement up?

As a matter of physics, there is no missile casing sufficiently strong to thrust deep enough into concrete or granite to prevent the spewing of radiation. Nuclear "bunker busters" would kill tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people across the Middle East. Have you ever heard of the javelin missile Senator? It fires a rocket into space that the releases a LED projectile the size of a school bus. It hits its target with the impact of a ten megaton nuke it was designed to take out deep underground fortified bunkers that the Soviets have That's at the extreme NON NUCLEAR Bunker Buster level we don't even need to use those. The standard ones like the ones we just sold Israel will work fine. Remember you elected IDIOT the ONLY PERSON who has said that they are going to use NUKES are the IRANIANS.

This would be a disastrous tragedy. First use of nuclear weapons by the United States should be unthinkable. A preemptive nuclear attack violates a central tenet of the "just war" and U.S. military traditions. You really are stupid aren't you?

There is no question that in the post-9/11 era, a full range of policy options for dealing with new and uncertain events should be on the table. But in my view, nuclear options cannot be considered as an extension of conventional options. Right that's why you want to kill the Patriot Act, the NSA Terrorist monitoring Program, and want to give OUR Bill of Rights to TERRORISTS captured on the battlefield.

So what steps should the United States be taking? BOMB THEM NOW!!!

TU.S. should engage Iran diplomatically. So far, England, France and Germany have led the negotiated effort to halt Iran's uranium enrichment, while Russia has explored other alternatives. It is time for the U.S. to lead such efforts, not stand by. Like I said after 3 years of talks 2 months ago Iran told them all of them to go Fuck Off!

We must push for a complete halt to Iran's enrichment activities and full access to all nuclear sites by the International Atomic Energy Agency. If Iran refuses, international sanctions should follow, and inspections with U.N. forces if necessary. Except that the Russians and the Chicoms won't agree to sanctions because of they're OIL DEALS with Iran. Russia is even building the Iranian Reactors you wackjob! Oh and once again aren't these the SAME UN forces we had monitoring the N. Koreans so they couldn't build a bomb?

At the same time, the U.S. needs to build international alliances to create a unified front opposed to Iran's quest for nuclear weapons. We have that already except for the Chicoms and the Russians for the above stated reasons ya twit.

The United States should learn the lesson of Iraq. It should not make the same mistake twice. There is broad agreement that Iran cannot be allowed to proceed with its nuclear programs and continue to flout the international community. Now is the time for tough diplomacy, joined by our allies, not a premature military confrontation that could include nuclear devastation. Yes we should look at Iraq, fore now Iraq is NO LONGER a threat to anyone in that Region. They may not be civilized yet and who nows they might break into civil war if the Democrats have their way and pull our troops out to soon, but other than to themselves, they are no longer a threat to anyone. Your way will lead to a Nuclear War caused by a madman that believes he is bringing back the Islamic Messiah and readying the world for his worldwide Caliphate.


No comments:

Post a Comment