web analytics

A SILENT ALLY…

By ATWadmin On November 11th, 2007

Nuclear_fireball.jpgI note that even the dovish elements in the Bush administration are losing patience with Gordon Brown over Iran, with senior American diplomats frustrated by his reluctance to declare bluntly that the Islamic state must never be allowed nuclear weapons.

Allies of Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, have said that the Prime Minister should emulate France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy and warn that Iran may face military action, in order to help avert a new war in the Middle East. But Gordon stays dumb.

In stark contrast, Mr Sarkozy has made clear that war will come. Last week, while in the US, he pointedly said that it was "unacceptable that Iran should have, at any point, a nuclear weapon", the exact words that the State Department wants to hear from Mr Brown. The French President had previously said that Teheran was presenting the world with a choice between "an Iranian bomb and bombing Iran". His foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, warned in September: "We must prepare for the worst. The worst is war."

But the Brown regime says nothing. It is absolutely petrified that war will come. It is in denial and is far too busy playing to the liberal media gallery to confront reality in the way that Sarkozy does. Isn’t it odd that France is now proving a better ally to the US than the UK under Brown?

23 Responses to “A SILENT ALLY…”

  1. al-gordo wasn’t voted in and isn’t fit to be the leader he believes himself to be. he has no time for the reality that the world is a dangerous place and sometimes we need to protect ourselves.
    that is why our Army, Air Force and Navy are being downgraded.

  2. Bush has yet to learn that Brown is NOT an international politician but a smalltime, short-term, provincial bank manager who just happens to find himself in charge of a country.
    He doesn’t want anything to rock Britain’s very shakey economy which, in reality, he has no control.
    Joining Bush (as Blair did) and saying I’m with you all the way in bombing Iran would seal his death-nell if it sparked off an oil crisis…which it would.

    I share his equivocation.

  3. Isn’t it odd that France is now proving a better ally to the US than the UK under Brown?

    Not really! Brown was always going to cool down the so-called special relationship, despite his general admiration for the USA where he has taken most of his holidays. On Iran, he is still clinging to the forlorn hope that the mullahs will see sense and back down in response to sanctions and diplomatic pressure.

    Well they won’t, any more than Sadaam did. A US attack is now a matter of when, not if.

  4. Peter,

    A US attack is now a matter of when, not if.

    Now, can you tell us exactly when, or will that depend on the outcome of the November 2008 election?

  5. Alan

    It will have to be soon. My bet would be within three months at most.

  6. Alan, I would say October ’08 just about right! 😉

  7. Peter and Charles,

    If Peter is right, Bush will have to pull a Musharraf and suspend the Constitution. If Charles is suggesting that a Democrat Congress will endorse a new war before the election, I beg to differ. Tell me why (and how) Bush will undertake this attack without prior Congressional ascent?

  8. Alan, my comment was a bit tongue in cheek, given pols ability to pull an "October surprise." Bush couldn’t get a war resolution through a Congress held by either party.

    BTW, what do you think of the Democrat inability to advance legislation?

  9. Charles,

    I think that it is difficult to attain the super-majority necessary to overcome a presidential veto when there is not a super-majority of Democrats in Congress. All the Republicans needed when they controlled both houses of Congress was a simple majority because they only once passed a law that Bush vetoed (just to show they could).

  10. Bush does not need a NEW resolution to bomb Iran. This is all part of the same war that congress has already authorized. Iran is a supporter of terrorism They are the HEAD of the beast.

    I would have loved to seen Roosevelt and Churchill have to have gone to there respective houses and beg permission before each battle of WWII.

    I also hate to break it to you but even if it doesn’t happen before the election and God forbid Hillary wins, she will bomb them also…

  11. Troll,

    Exactly how is it part of the same war that congress has already authorized?

  12. simple they authorized what ever needed to be done to combat terrorism. That’s a blanket authorization. It is also why they had a hissy fit over declaring Irans revelutionary Guard a terror orginization.

    Look there is also something basic that your side seems to miss The Democrats in the house and the Senate can convince themselves all they want that this is all GWs fault and if it wasn’t for him the Islamofacists would all be peace, love, and Bobby Sherman.

    The American people and the majority of the people in Europe know damn well that it makes no difference who is President or what party is in power in the US.

    These people are at war with us, we can either fight or surrendor that is our choice.

    But no matter what we choose they have already chosen to be at war with us, one side in a war can’t just declare peace. You either defeat the enemy or surrendor The Islamofacists understand that even if the western left can’t.

  13. Here’s your ‘peace’ – Submit or Die.

  14. Troll and Monica

    I think you’ve got this one about right. If these guys get their hands on nuclear weapons the whole of the middle east will be destabilised and a third world war will have moved much closer.

    The thought of bombing them is scary too, because the outcome cannot be predicted in terms of political fallout in the region, but it is definitely the lesser of two evils, assuming it succeeds in its objective.

  15. Peter – it’s been allowed to get beyond the critical point once again – as it has in all history. It’s going to be God-awful to deal with, worse than if we hadn’t allowed it to come this far. Actually it’s going to have to go farther even, it looks like.

    It will be hell.

  16. Well that’s always the way isn’t it…the politicians dither and jockey for advantage or simply tremble and hope the problem will go away, and with every passing day the inevitable conflict looms closer but becomes harder to win.

    And thanks to the Iraq adventure the war against Iran that should have already happened may actually come too late in the end. History may not condemn Bush for imaginary ‘crimes against humanity’ or for ‘starting a war for oil’ or other such rubbish, but it will condemn him for making it so difficult to eliminate a regime which would have fallen like ninepins before it even got close to obtaining nukes, if only he hadnt missed the right target first time around.

  17. Ther is no Congressional authorizaton or support for war agains Iran.

  18. Troll,

    I’ve been away all day, and I’m just getting back to this thread. I am still confused as to which blanket authorization you are talking about. Do you mean the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq"? If not, was there an authorization I missed?

  19. Troll,

    The only other Authorization for Use of Military Force I could find is also very specific when it says that

    the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001

    So there are two non-blanket authorizations. Where is the blanket one?

  20. Have you seen this? Anti-nuclear activist says Iran has the right to nuclear weapons

    http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20071112_Iran_has_a_right_to_seek_nuclear_capability.html

  21. We’ve got more problems than just Iran. The Syrian nuke facility that the Israelis just took out was supplied by the North Koreans. How many more of these site could there be in the ME?

    So, we’ve got the N. Koreans arming hostile states with nuclear capability, Iran coming online with nuclear capability (from everything I’ve read they have numerous well-hidden underground facilities), Pakistan is already nuclear capable and highly unstable. Iraq is nowhere near politically stable. Russia is playing games in the region. The Turks are having issues. Throw in all the terrorist groups operating in the area with impunity and I think you’ve got a major cluster f**k in the works.

    Taking out as much of Iran’s capability as possible seems likely, but I don’t think that alone is going to solve the overall problem. In my opinion, Syria and North Korea need to be dealt with immediately and we better start dealing better with Putin.

  22. Daphne

    You’re all doom and gloom today aren’t you ?

  23. It’s the painting, mullions today, arghhh……..I’m beginning to think the painter’s wives need shoes more than I do. 🙂