Not true, I have stayed away from a rousing game of lawyerball because it’d serve no point. Iran-Iraq is 12 points, Khobar towers was 2.7 points with a tripple word score bonus!
My points have been simple, have been supported by mounds of evidence, and backed up by logic that’s actually very elementary. I’ll lay them out again.
- Iran funds, arms, trains and gives safe haven to Hezballah.
- It does not matter if Iran ‘controls’ or merely has a large quantity of influence over Hezballah. Their continued support with weapons, training, financing and safe haven has continued during and after Hezballah has made its goals and methods clear. There is no way you can argue that Iran doesn’t know what Hezballah is, what their goals are, what their methods are, or who their likely targets are. Plausible deniability only goes so far.
- Hezballah has cells in the United States, Europe and south of the border.
- Hezballah has a long history of attacks against western targets and against American civilians and military targets in specific.
- Iran’s continued support for Hezballah, during periods in which Hezballah was murdering Americans, makes them responsible for their actions. That Iran still funds Hezballah shows they have not disassociated themselves from Hezballah’s goals, methods or likely targets.
- Iran’s continued relationship with Hezballah makes Iran a threat. Not, necessarily, a threat that will bite us tomorrow or next Thursday, but a threat none the less. Anybody who tells you that Iran is definitely not a threat, or is definitely going to attack tomorrow is trying to sell you something.
- Until Iran renounces support of Hezballah, any attempts by them to secure influence in the region will be simple acts of self serving self interest, not overtures to peace. Until they stop supporting the terrorist organization that has cells within our country, the rest is window dressing.
- The existence of Iran’s nuclear program was totally independent of W, as it began more than a decade before he took office.
- The existence of Iran’s nuclear program was totally independent of W’s “axis of evil speech”, as it began more than a decade before it.
- Iran’s nuclear program was covert, partially conducted on the black market, buried underground, and much of it was only exposed by the whistleblowing involvement of dissidents in the government.
- A clandestine nuclear program that goes back with at least 20 years of black market activity, is hidden from the IAEA and only revealed by opponents to the government cannot be considered transparent.
- 20 years of a non-transparent nuclear program is cause for suspicion and cause to doubt Iran’s honest and intentions.
- Although Iran is now cooperating with the IAEA, its 20 year history of a secret nuclear program, which carried on at least until 2002, should give most people pause in considering whether they have been 100% forthright and honest with the IAEA.
- The IAEA is not omniscient, and can only see what they can see. The IAEA missed, for instance, any hints about Syria’s emerging nuclear program until after Israel had already smashed it.
- As such, anybody who tells you that they are certain there is no Iranian covert nuclear weapons program and/or no intention to start one once they’re under less scrutiny, or someone who tells you it’s absolutely certain that’s the case is trying to sell you something.
- So, we have a situation where the only honest answer is “maybe” and the only honest description of the system is a dangerous uncertainty. And anybody who tells you that Iran is an innocent lamb that’s absolutely no threat, or anybody who tells you that Iran is a dangerous dragon that will nuke Manhattan tomorrow is trying to sell you something.
My objection, and it’s one that’s particularly relevant to the mission statement of this board, is that ignorance on this topic seems to be widespread and willful. People who are opposed to war have adopted several myths to bolster their case, and have repeated falsehoods such as Iran’s benevolence and lack of military aggression since 1979, that their nuclear program was somehow a response to Bush, that all the facts of their nuclear program are perfectly clear and obviously in daylight now and that Iran is a civil society.
I believe that anybody who participates in one of these strangely popular debates should, at the very minimum, be equipped with the facts on this topic rather than repeating untruths simply because they bolster an anti-war case. It is unfortunate.
You could, ya know, ask that handsome devil.
(If you were kind, you could also continue where we left off and let me know if you’ve read up on Hezballah’s history or checked out the information about Hezballah cells within the US, etc…)
You are correct, I got caught up in fighting ignorance and untruths because keeping the discussion honest seemed like a more pressing concern.
On the subject of the OP, I have already posted, directly addressing it.
As for whether or not war would be a “good idea”, that depends on situations that are either opaque or have not transpired yet and intel that I am simply not privy to. Again, anybody who tries to tell you, for certain, what Iran and/or Hezballah are going to do is trying to sell you something. Maybe next week Iran will say it’s had enough of inspectors, kick them out, and begin transferring spent fuel rods to a hidden weaponization site. Maybe the roughly 70% of Iranian citizenry who are sick to death of their totalitarian theocracy and who are friendly towards America will rise up and we can re-establish good relations. Maybe Hezballah will decide to blow up a few more Jewish community centers and will figure that Manhattan is a good place to do it in. Maybe the Supreme Leader will give a few plastic keys to some Iranian kids and send them over to the US with a dirty bomb in their luggage. Maybe, maybe, maybe.
Anybody who tells you anything as a certainty is trying to sell you something. I’m not buying.
America should remain vigilant, in a defensive stance and be ready to react with maximum prejudice to any possible immediate threat. We should not assume that Iran is serious about peace until they make actual gestures like stopping to fund global terrorism and cutting off the flow that supports Hezballah cells that are within our own borders. And/or, as many of the reports of Iranian involvment in Iraq are credible, stopping any and all covert actions in support of the insurgents as well as interdicting any weapon shipments sent over the border by ‘bad apples’. Otherwise, any Iranian attempts to secure influence in the region are not overtures of peace, they are overtures of getting us to help them gain power. The two are not identical.
), Hezbollah’s terrorist activity in the U.S. is limited to smuggling cigarettes, and they fear to do more because a law-enforcement crackdown would dry up that source of funding. yawn Of course, an attack on Iran might change that calculus profoundly (as one of your quotations seemed to indicate, threatening, “If Bush attacks Iran he is dead” – about which possibility I admit to mixed feelings, inclining strongly toward indifference).