web analytics

IRAN AND THE BOMB…

By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2007

795151-765848-thumbnail.jpgWriting over on the Daily Telegraph, Daniel Hannan urges us to take firm action now before Iran gets nukes. This is interesting because Hannan opposed the war in Iraq but feels so frightened by what the Ayatollah’s have in mind that he suggests that military action to remove the nuclear threat is going to be most likely necessary. He makes many of the obvious points, the most telling being that unlike in the Cold War, we are not dealing with rational adversaries. Instead we face a death cult which sees the shining prospect of wiping the Little Satan – Israel – off the map once and for all. It also sees that the "International community" lacks the resolve to take direct action and prefer to witter on about dialogue being the way forward. But "dialogue" will not stop the Mullahs, and "dialogue" buys Iran time to ensure it can threaten a wide region with atomic annihilation should it be opposed. Daniel Hannan says that bombing Iran’s nuke facilities is a last option, I say it’s our only option if we really want to stop the Mullah’s trying to finish what Hitler started – they see the second Holocaust as a dream come true, surely the rest of us see it as a nightmare that must not be allowed?

22 Responses to “IRAN AND THE BOMB…”

  1. Couldn’t agree with you more. As President Ahmadinejad awaits the coming of the mahdi and the destruction of Israel the nukes would not be in rational hands.
    there comes a time when the only way to face threats of violence is with violence. (sorry i don’t think Gandhi would have survived long against the current islamists).

  2. Whatever few sensible options the West had last week, they have now become even fewer with the collapse of legal government in Pakistan (a major event curiously unmentioned on this site!), which effectively means that US policy in the region is now in tatters and the Bush-Cheney-NeoCon axis has lead the West into one unholy mess and managed to make a laughing stock of US foreign policy.

  3. Noel,

    I consider Pakistan to be our enemy.

  4. Israel is the Sudetenland of our time and how the west deals with it will determine our fate. If the regime in Iran gets the bomb and uses it as they say that they would, then what exactly would Brussels do other than urge "restraint", whatever that may mean.

  5. Noel,

    You do come out with some daft things. Who are you to define what is ‘legal’ in Pakistan or not, you little Tranzi you :). Under the 2002 Constitution elections can be delayed by up to a year in a state of emergency which I dont think it can be denied this is, so whether you think the delaying of elections is ‘right’ or not, it *is* legal.

    A large part of Musharraf’s argument for taking the actions that he has is that elements of the Judiciary have been deliberately abusing their powers prevent the normal functioning of government by trying to prosecute government agencies and employees on utterly spurious grounds – over a thousand pending cases! – and also with malicious prosecutions against Police and also with politically-motivated acquitals for terrorists, some of whom have gone out and committed more crimes.

    Now this may or may not be true. But i’m betting that if there is any ‘collapse of legal government’ in Pakistan it is due to islamist elements committing violence and intimidation aided by an Islamist-influenced judiciary, and Musharraf is now acting to stop this happening any further.

    I would say that as Musharraf has moved against some of the focal points of the Islamist opposition (like that bastard Imran Khan who called for Jihad on British streets not much more than a year ago whilst British Muslims gave him Nazi salutes, all at a conference sponsored by the bloody Met!) this would strengthen US Policy in the area, not hurt it?

  6. OK, you may be right regarding the technical legality of this move (although deploying the army to surround the Supreme Court instead of the many terrorist camps in the country tells us a lot about his political priorities and his respect for the rule of law), but it matters little for US policy in the region.

    They still have Turkey, I suppose. Don’t know if you’ve ever been to the place, but the Turks are known to fleece mercilessly anyone they suspect desperately needs what they have on offer.

  7. ‘But i’m betting that if there is any ‘collapse of legal government’ in Pakistan it is due to islamist elements committing violence and intimidation aided by an Islamist-influenced judiciary, and Musharraf is now acting to stop this happening any further.’

    DSD, that is a good point. It could also be that Musharraf is using circumstances in Pakistan with the extremists, to cement his power. He is not or has he ever been a democrat!
    But yours is a well argued point.

  8. Pinky, how would you assess the motives of a dictator who, after declaring a state of emergency, immediately orders his troops to surround the Supreme Court that was, coincidentally, just about to rule on whether his election was legitimate or not; and which then batton lawyers off the streets and, today, fire tear gas shells at them in the High Court in Lahore?

    We know from ATW of course how unpopular lawyers are among the Right, but tear-gassing them is surely taking things a bit too far, I should think! Except maybe for Alison, of course.

  9. Pakistan worries me more than Iran at the moment. I am not sure if the General’s actions are "legal" as they certainly seem undemocratic. However, I’d prefer stability in Pakistan to anything else.

  10. He is not or has he ever been a democrat!

    So what? What is this fetish for ‘democracy’? Ok, so you get to scrawl an ‘X’ on a piece of paper every few years – big deal. Woohoo. Let the good times roll.

    As in Thailand and Turkey, it seems as if the Pakistani military is performing a rather useful service – that of preventing arbitrary civilian power from acting unchecked at the expense of freedom (which knocks democracy out the window on the list of life’s essentials).

    In the US it falls to the Supreme Court to defend the individual. In the UK, it will again fall to the House of Lords once we regain our sovereignty. If the Turks, Thais and Pakis rely on their military, well who are we to argue in imperiously against that?

  11. I think it was the Supreme Court which was surrounded rather than terrorist training camps because the Supreme Court is easier to access and if it has been paralysing Government and deliberately releasing terrorists out of Islamist sympathies then it would be the place to start.

    I love the image though – crowds of besuited Pakistani lawyers charging heroically at riot police lol.

    It isnt ‘undemocratic’ to stop a bunch of religious lunatics from taking over your country. It’s just common sense. We all know that the situation in Pakistan was reaching boiling point, and with the judiciary (which after some research seems has a lot more power in Pakistan than in Western societies) in the Islamists’ pockets then Musharraf seems not to have had much choice. We’ve seen it in Afghanistan as well, where the judiciary was (and some think still *is*) fatally compromised by Taliban sympathies.

    Bottom line – like I said the other day about Charles Johnson, walk a mile in these shoes and then you can comment.

  12. Pete Moore and DSD

    You both ignore the enormous influence of the Pakistan army. It is not just traditional armed forces, it is more of an industry with vast wealth and influence in the senior ranks. What they say goes, and that could well mean the end of Musharraf any day now. Whether they will take on the jihadists in the tribal areas is very doubtful, because there are islamist sympathisers in the senior ranks of the army as well as in the judiciary.

    Pakistan could easily become a thuggish islamist theocracy – like Iran, only it already has the bomb at its disposal. Be afraid.

  13. A little bone for Noel to chew on.

    Yes, yes Pakistan is a mess and a dangerous one at that. Other than the fact that if musharif falls Bin Laden and those of his ilk will not only have nukes and the systems to deliver them with, including a couple of missile subs, I ask you who cares.

    The reason I ask is because none of that stuff can reach the US the only western nations that they could attack are those in Europe. and it’s obvious Europe does not care about its external threats.

    I laugh at this assinine statement of yours:

    "which effectively means that US policy in the region is now in tatters and the Bush-Cheney-NeoCon axis has lead the West into one unholy mess and managed to make a laughing stock of US foreign policy."

    Number 1 who have we lead? At least the US has a policy, Unlike the Western Countries in Europe who are just waiting to be slaughtered like the socialist cud chewing cows that they are.

    Walking around moooing and chewing their cud as the Islamofacist butcher sharpens his blade to cut your throat. It is you who are the laughing stocks and its the Islamofacists that are laughing.

    In fighting a war plans change the minute the first shots are fired. At least our foreign policy is one of engagement where your Europes is one of the victim awaiting slaughter

  14. >>I ask you who cares.<<

    Well, I’d say the government that you finance with you taxes does, as do the US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan who still believe your country is fighting a "War on Terror".

    But I’m glad to hear you seem to have seen through that lie at least and at last.

    By launching an offensive war without international backing, by riding roughshod over international law and conventions, by portraying these wars as a "crusade", which inevitably led to some war crimes being committed by US forces, your government successfully undermined "Busharraf" even while they were supporting his hold on power with literally billions of Dollars annually.

    But if you’ve got money – and your country a foreign policy – to throw away, then you’re right, who cares!

  15. noel your an ass…

    in 1979 the Islamofacists declared war on the US and the rest of the western world for 20 years the US and the rest of the western world did NOTHING while the Islamist built networks of terror and fanatics through out the world. On sept 11th all that culminated in a wake up call IN our country. They could have kept killing you europeans and US citizens in drips and drabs overseas for decades more except and we would have done NOTHING but they were stupid enough to attack us at home.

    We are at war.

    You and your ilk may go quetly into the night but we won’t! The shooting part of this war has just started and it’s going to get a lot uglier.

    You got 3 choices Worship 1)Allah as a second class citizen and stay in your place, 2)get killed for not worshipping Allah, or 3)kill everyone that is trying to force you to worship Allah

    We choose 3

  16. You missed Option 4 Troll

    4) Stop inflaming the middle-east and the world by attempting to control oil that doesn’t belong to you. Stop funding a zionist state that has no legitimacy and which takes land which does not belong to it ( the old testament is not a title deed). Stop trying to invent wars as a way of expanding your militant capitalism.

    How about trying number 4 once in a while, it may help

  17. "A Zionist state that has no legitimacy". This is the preamble to a demand for the abolition of Israel. What happens to the 6 million Jews?

  18. in 1979 the Islamofacists declared war on the US and the rest of the western world for 20 years the US and the rest of the western world did NOTHING while the Islamist built networks of terror and fanatics through out the world. On sept 11th all that culminated in a wake up call IN our country. They could have kept killing you europeans and US citizens in drips and drabs overseas for decades more except and we would have done NOTHING but they were stupid enough to attack us at home.

    We are at war. […..]

    LOL. and im the conspiracy theorist?

  19. Troll missed the bit in 1953, when the CIA declared war on Iranian democracy.

  20. Daytripper,

    How is that conspiracy theory? Are you still pretending that all terrorism is just a front for NATO? Or was it the CIA, I forget…

  21. Gaskin shows his anti-semitism, Hey Chris if the arabs have a better claim to that land what is it?

    I also love the way you blame the US for inflaming the middle east, seems to me if you want to start pointing fingers I blame the Moores when they conqured all of europe or the egyptions under pharoe who ripped the jews from judea and enslaved them

    Being a supporter of terror and the politics of terror in your own country I wouldn’t expect you to be rational. In my opinion you look at the process of fighting a war with terror as legitimate and therefore rendor your opinion mute….

  22. How is that conspiracy theory? Are you still pretending that all terrorism is just a front for NATO? Or was it the CIA, I forget

    DSD,

    i never said all. i did say that it is historical fact that it has been used as an ideological tool in the past to undermine certain opposition movements or political groups. and that we shouldnt be so quick to discount its use today.

    i understand that adding such dynamics to any issue is anathema to the Good vs Evil logic of rightworld, but there you go. Just do what Troll does and avoid certain facts that destroy his history lesson in one swoop. mao would be proud of trolls use of the year zero method to historical analysis.

    In my opinion you look at the process of fighting a war with terror as legitimate and therefore rendor your opinion mute.

    Troll,

    Terrorism is seen as a legitimate form of warfare by all nations. that is why no nation will ratify a legally binding definition of the term.