Michael Kolker: Only Force Will Stop Iran
It should be obvious to anyone paying even casual attention to the actions and statements of the leaders of Iran that nothing short of military action will stop their pursuit of nuclear weapons. The leaders of Iran have made their intentions clear: They are determined to develop nuclear weapons, they are determined to destroy the State of Israel, and they are willing to sacrifice and kill their own citizens to stay in power and achieve their goals.
Appeasement and negotiation cannot work with such people. Deterrence and sanctions cannot work with such people. Sanctions will only harm the people of Iran, and the leaders care nothing for their welfare.
If the history of the last century teaches us anything, it is that there is evil in the world, and the sooner evil is confronted and defeated, the better. Appeasing evil only makes the ultimate destruction and death much worse when the inevitable confrontation occurs.
Democracies are traditionally and understandably reluctant to take military action to defeat evil, even in the face of imminent and undeniable threats. Dictators use that reluctance to achieve their goals, while giving democracies the false hope that negotiation and appeasement can avoid military conflict. This scenario, which was played out in the 1930's is being repeated today.
There are “politically correct” pundits and commentators who argue that Iran’s quest for nuclear power does not constitute a threat to the West. They argue that the leaders of Iran are “rational” and “pragmatic”. They argue that Iran is essentially a peaceful country that has not attacked or invaded another country in over 30 years. They even will argue that the constant threats coming from the leaders of Iran that Israel must be destroyed have been misinterpreted.
This is a blatantly false and a disingenuous argument. In fact, Iran has repeatedly attacked and terrorized another nation: Israel. It has done so through its agents, Hamas and Hizbullah. These groups have fired literally thousands of missiles at Israeli civilians in recent years. Iran supplied many of these weapons, and continues to attempt to ship weapons to these groups even today. These are not the acts of an essentially peaceful regime.
Winston Churchill called World War II "The Unnecessary War", because it could have been prevented if the world's democracies had forcefully confronted Nazi Germany earlier, when its intentions were obvious. The world's failure to do so resulted in the most destructive war in human history and the death of hundreds of millions of people, including 6 Million Jews. The death count and destruction would have certainly been even worse if Hitler had possessed nuclear weapons.
In politics and foreign policy, the important decisions are often is not between the good and bad, but between the bad and worse. Taking military action against Iran to cripple its nuclear weapons program would certainly have terrible and unforeseeable consequences. Allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons would be catastrophic for the entire world, and not just for the 6 million Jews of Israel. Nuclear radiation does not stop at the borders of states, and cannot distinguish between Jews and non-Jews.
Mr. Obama acknowledged the presence of evil in the world in his speech accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. One can only hope he has the wisdom, foresight and courage to confront the leaders in Iran with military force sooner, rather than later. It is obvious nothing else will stop them.
Appeasement and negotiation cannot work with such people. Deterrence and sanctions cannot work with such people. Sanctions will only harm the people of Iran, and the leaders care nothing for their welfare.
If the history of the last century teaches us anything, it is that there is evil in the world, and the sooner evil is confronted and defeated, the better. Appeasing evil only makes the ultimate destruction and death much worse when the inevitable confrontation occurs.
Democracies are traditionally and understandably reluctant to take military action to defeat evil, even in the face of imminent and undeniable threats. Dictators use that reluctance to achieve their goals, while giving democracies the false hope that negotiation and appeasement can avoid military conflict. This scenario, which was played out in the 1930's is being repeated today.
There are “politically correct” pundits and commentators who argue that Iran’s quest for nuclear power does not constitute a threat to the West. They argue that the leaders of Iran are “rational” and “pragmatic”. They argue that Iran is essentially a peaceful country that has not attacked or invaded another country in over 30 years. They even will argue that the constant threats coming from the leaders of Iran that Israel must be destroyed have been misinterpreted.
This is a blatantly false and a disingenuous argument. In fact, Iran has repeatedly attacked and terrorized another nation: Israel. It has done so through its agents, Hamas and Hizbullah. These groups have fired literally thousands of missiles at Israeli civilians in recent years. Iran supplied many of these weapons, and continues to attempt to ship weapons to these groups even today. These are not the acts of an essentially peaceful regime.
Winston Churchill called World War II "The Unnecessary War", because it could have been prevented if the world's democracies had forcefully confronted Nazi Germany earlier, when its intentions were obvious. The world's failure to do so resulted in the most destructive war in human history and the death of hundreds of millions of people, including 6 Million Jews. The death count and destruction would have certainly been even worse if Hitler had possessed nuclear weapons.
In politics and foreign policy, the important decisions are often is not between the good and bad, but between the bad and worse. Taking military action against Iran to cripple its nuclear weapons program would certainly have terrible and unforeseeable consequences. Allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons would be catastrophic for the entire world, and not just for the 6 million Jews of Israel. Nuclear radiation does not stop at the borders of states, and cannot distinguish between Jews and non-Jews.
Mr. Obama acknowledged the presence of evil in the world in his speech accepting the Nobel Peace Prize. One can only hope he has the wisdom, foresight and courage to confront the leaders in Iran with military force sooner, rather than later. It is obvious nothing else will stop them.
Views: 31
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by skimble on -
The comparison you have made with the events preceding World War II is particularly apt in the case of Iran. If WWII started just two years later, Nazi Germany would have already possessed jet aircraft and would have had an advanced nuclear weapons program with realistic chances of success later in the war.
Given two years, Iran would complete the two heavy water reactors so as to produce enough plutonium for several warheads a year. Meanwhile it seems that lacking plutonium they try to develop a uranium device to fit inside a Shahab 3 warhead that could carry a more advanced two stage device if plutonium was available.
When a choice is between peace and war, any sane person would choose peace. But when the choice becomes war sooner or nuclear war later it is not unreasonable to skip the waiting part.
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Talbot on -
Excellent article. Unfortunately, many of today's western politicians are career politicians whose main strength is talking in the abstract - some have never had any military experience nor held a job requiring decisions or accountability.
It's no wonder none compare to Churchill, Kennedy, Thatcher, Reagan, Meir who always projected an image to dictators that any dictator who took them on would bear the consequences of their actions.
Churchill bore the consequences of his predecessor's weakness - but consider the others .... Cuba Missile Crisis, Falklands, Iran/Berlin, and Munich .... whilst each was tested, it was more to probe any weakness. When none was found, dictators tended to back off until a change of leadership occurred. One lesson keenly understood by Israel, but not it seems the US/Europe.
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Bernier on -
Every American should know the truth
No one should miss this video:
http://xrl.us/bf29mb
Look to the end ( 10 min.)
-
Permalink Reply by Robert Bernier on
-
Iran, the biggest danger to the Middle East and to the world.
An irrational nuclear Iran in the region is not conceivable. A stable nuclear balance of power/balance of terror in the Middle East would be out of the question (nuclear proliferation in the M.E. could never create the same sort of stable equilibrium that was once obtained between the USA and USSR). ISRAEL MUST REMAIN THE REGION’S ONLY NUCLEAR POWER. Moreover, Iran’s program should not become a powerful proliferation driver, building on regional rivalry security concerns and one-upmanship. More at : http://israelagainstterror.blogspot.com/2009/03/iran-targets-us.html
Link to Us, Like Us, Watch Us!
Translate This Page!
II top views
Recent II articles
David M. Weinberg: The ungrateful Noam Schalit should count his blessings, stop whining, and shut up
Over a hundred rockets launched at Israel, but Iron Dome proves effective: schools in south canceled
Get special rates on Israel flights
© 2012 Created by Israel Insider.
