Here is Obama's preferred plan in a nutshell:
- Avoid violence at all costs
- Let the Iranian nuclear and missile programs go forward, while administering economic sanctions from time-to-time (if possible), in an attempt to control them.
- Impose international financial sanctions on the leaders of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (these folks are wealthy and powerful) to encourage them to restrain or overthow Ahmadinejad
- Continue covert activities in Iran to damage their programs and encourage dissent, especially among the Sunni resistance
- Use SM-3 equipped Aegis ships in the Persian Gulf to interdict any attack from Israel on Iran, and Iran on Israel or the Gulf States
- Provide the Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia, with Patriot missile batteries in order to mollify them
- Seduce Syria's Assad away from Iran
- Have Israel give up land for peace
- Build a Palestinian state
Of course, history--even recent history--shows that all of this is a terrible mistake that will lay the seeds for a huge future war, which will probably be fought with nuclear weapons.
Israel has tried "land for peace" many times before--and even has offered to have a separate Palestinian state. It never works because the so-called Palestinians don't want land and don't want their own state. They want the destruction of Israel and will settle for nothing less. After all, they are backed and controlled by Iran. (Note that I say "so-called" because the "Palestinians" didn't come into being as an ethnic group until the 1960s.)
Iran wants the destruction of Israel, and will settle for nothing less. Letting them build nukes and long range missiles (with the help of the North Koreans, by the way) greatly increases the probability that Iran will soon rule the entire Mideast -- and wipe Israel off the map. If nothing is done in the next 5 years, it becomes a virtual certainty.
Do we really think that the Revolutionary Guard is going to overthrow Ahmadinejad if we pressure them a little? And Syria is tight with Iran; Assad even made fun of Hillary, who had asked him to separate his country from Iran:
We met today [with Iran's Ahmadinejad] to sign a separation agreement between Syria and Iran, but things went wrong probably because of translation or lack of understanding, so we signed an agreement to remove the requirement for entry visas instead. I do not know whether these two things are consistent. I wonder how they [the US] can talk about stability in the Middle East and all other such attractive principles while at the same time calling for the separation of two countries, Syria and Iran, regardless of the strategic relations between them and their belief in shared principles.Regardless, we are rewarding Assad by opening an embassy in Syria, and sending a permanent ambassador after many years of having no relations with the terrorist regime.
And the Saudis have repudiated Defense Secretary Robert Gates's version of their recent meeting:
[T]he Saudis publicly repudiated Gates' statement after his arrival in Abu Dhabi that he had obtained Saudi consent to come aboard US diplomacy on Iran and play its part by leaning hard on China to endorse sanctions. On March 13, the royal house issued this bulletin: "This issue is not true, it was not discussed during the visit of the secretary of defense who was in the kingdom recently."
Nowadays, people in the west often delude themselves into thinking that their enemies are like themselves: i.e. they have families and want the best for their children and are really good people inside etc. This is bull. In the Mideast, many Palestinians are exceptionally proud to send their children off as suicide bombers. They wish they had more children so that there could be more bombs against Israel.
And the Shiites are looking for their Twelfth Imam to come back to them as the messiah Mahdi. Ahmadinejad believes he can hasten his arrival by erasing Israel. Diplomacy doesn't work if the entire meaning of life for one side is based on fulfilling end-of-the-world prophecies, which include "cleansing" the earth of the Jewish people.
This is shaping up to be very similar to 1938. Here is what Neville Chamberlain said, after he met with Hitler on the 30th of September of that year. I quote it in full because the stupid delusions expressed are so similar to the present rhetoric:
We, the German Führer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for two countries and for Europe. We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again. We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries, and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe. My good friends this is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honor. I believe it is peace in our time.
Chamberlain with the agreement
Really the only way to extinguish this fire is to join with Israel to put Iran completely out of business. It should have been done years ago, before Iran built its cavernous deeply-buried facilities. It is doubtful that they can be destroyed with normal penetrating bombs --and the new MOP bomb is not ready and may not work. At this point, it is probably nukes or nothing.
Obama has chosen to do nothing -- or worse than nothing since he is blocking Israel from even acting alone.
A final question: Once again, I must ask: If Obama's intent was the destruction of the United States, would he be doing anything differently?
Yeah, and the same to you too..