He says that the critics arguing for war should be the first to the frontlines.
If I were always wrong about predictions or analyses, I would shut my mouth instead of proving to everyone that I’m a fool.
Too bad it doesn’t work that way in Washington.
The same people who have been wrong on most everything when it comes to the Middle East are at it again, and they’re asking you to believe them. Again. They’re urging the defeat of an agreement with Iran that’s intended to stop that nation from getting a nuclear weapon. (Yes, I strongly disagree with Huckabee recently calling our president “naïve,” explained in my colleague’s piece . Earlier this spring, the same colleague defended a story he wrote about the inconsistencies in a letter from 47 Senators to Iran in .)
The very same people who put Iran in the position to build a nuclear weapon in the first place shouldn’t be trusted now.
I recall the days after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in 2001 when I was a reporter for the Los Angeles Times and covering the Ontario International Airport in the Inland Empire.
We knew right away that the Bush Administration would go after al Qaeda, but it was obvious to me that that wouldn’t be enough. I remember sitting at a table at a fast food restaurant in the airport telling some of the political figures present what was to come next.
The Bush Administration wouldn’t be satisfied by their efforts in Afghanistan and would turn to removing Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
The Bush Administration talked about getting rid of what they thought were weapons of mass destruction, but I always believed that part of their plan from the start was to try and spread democracy throughout the Middle East, starting in Iraq.
Anyone who knows anything about the Middle East, and Iraq in particular, knew that any such plan was doomed from the start.
First, having a dictator in Iraq kept sectarian forces in check that would be unleashed if Hussein was ousted.
Second, Iraq had been a check on Iran and any nuclear and other ambitions it had.
Finally, the US would pay a heavy price for invading Iraq and cost thousands of lives, deplete American forces, and make Americans weary of any future campaigns in the Middle East.
Iran helped the US after the Sept. 11 attacks and we never took the opportunity to reach out to them after that but tried to isolate them as a rogue nation.
Under the Bush Administration, which had limited sanctions in place against Iran, that country escalated a program to get a nuclear bomb like never before.
Since then, Iraq is in tatters, and ISIS has used the vacuum to secure a presence in the country.
Those who opposed the invasion of Iraq thought that these would be the consequences. They were right, and the war hawks were wrong.
Now those same war hawks want to scuttle any deal with Iran, claiming it will help Iran get the bomb.
There are only two ways to keep Iran from getting the bomb: Get them to not build one, or invade Iran and take it over at a cost of tens of thousands of lives.
You don’t want to invade Iran. Iraq and its aftermath was a cakewalk compared to what that would be.
With an agreement, you get inspections, oversight, and steps that would mean that Iran would be at least a year away from getting a bomb if they so desired to get it in the future. Without one, there are no inspections, and Iran could get a bomb in a few months. How is that good?
If Iran gets the bombs, look for the Arab nations to follow suit, and a nuclear-armed Middle East would become the world’s nightmare – and could lead to the nuclear holocaust that’s always been feared since Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Yes. Iran is a rogue nation and spreads havoc throughout the Middle East, and that won’t stop anytime soon.
That logic never stopped us from reaching nuclear deals with the Soviet Union, even though they created havoc as well. At least Iran won’t have a bomb.
There is no guarantee, but we can hope that the lifting of economic sanctions against Iran and improvement in people’s lives will ultimately lead to change in that nation that stops Iran’s foreign involvements to the degree they occur today.
The deal is the best we can do, and if Iran doesn’t live up to it in the future, we always have the option of war to stop them from getting the bomb. At least we would have more time to mobilize than we do today and would get the international community behind us.
I know the critics say Iran can’t be trusted, but that’s why you have inspections. There is no other solution right now than war, and if that’s what they want, just tell the American people that and see what response you get.
Those who support war should be the first to land in Iran.