P
Patriot Games
Guest
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Podhoretz:_bomb_iran/2008/01/18/65655.html
Podhoretz: We Should Still Bomb Iran
Friday, January 18, 2008
President Bush should disregard the National Intelligence Estimate's recent
downplaying of the Iranian threat and destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities -
or else nuclear war will be "inescapable," declares neocon commentator
Norman Podhoretz.
Podhoretz, editor-at-large of Commentary, writes in the February issue that
he first stated a year ago that Bush would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities
before leaving office.
But then came December's release of a report from the NIE, which alleged
that Iran had halted its nuclear-weapons program in 2003 - while
acknowledging that the program could be restarted at any time.
In spite of "efforts to demonstrate that the new NIE did not prove that Iran
had given up its pursuit of nuclear weapons, just about everyone in the
world immediately concluded otherwise, and further concluded that this meant
the military option was off the table," Podhoretz writes.
Podhoretz, author of the new book "World War IV: The Long Struggle Against
Islamofascism," recounts a conversation he had with a member of America's
foreign-policy establishment.
"He took the position that there was really no need to stop [the Iranians]
in the first place, since even if they had the bomb they could be deterred
from using it, just as effectively as the Soviets and Chinese had been
deterred during the cold war.
"In response, I argued that deterrence could not be relied upon with a
regime ruled by Islamofascist revolutionaries who not only were ready to die
for their beliefs, but cared less about protecting their people than about
the spread of their ideology and their power."
With the NIE seemingly making it "politically impossible" for Bush to attack
Iran, Podhoretz says the U.S. could choose to "outsource" the job to Israel.
If the mullahs in Iran obtained nuclear weapons, a nuclear exchange with
Israel would become "inevitable," Podhoretz opines, and could even force
Israel to attack key Arab neighbors to prevent them from capitalizing on the
destruction wrought by the Iranian attack.
The resulting horrors would "be far greater than even the direst
consequences that might follow from bombing Iran before it reaches the point
of no return" and obtains the bomb, Podhoretz observes.
But he believes Israel, despite its military strength, would find it
difficult to adequately destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities - so "it is the
United States that will have to do the preventing, to do it by means of a
bombing campaign, and . to do it soon."
Unless we do, he concludes, "we had all better pray that there will be
enough time for the next president to discharge the responsibility that Bush
will have been forced to pass on, and that this successor will also have the
clarity and the courage to discharge it.
"If not - God help us all - the stage will have been set for the outbreak of
a nuclear war that will become as inescapable then as it is avoidable now."
Podhoretz: We Should Still Bomb Iran
Friday, January 18, 2008
President Bush should disregard the National Intelligence Estimate's recent
downplaying of the Iranian threat and destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities -
or else nuclear war will be "inescapable," declares neocon commentator
Norman Podhoretz.
Podhoretz, editor-at-large of Commentary, writes in the February issue that
he first stated a year ago that Bush would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities
before leaving office.
But then came December's release of a report from the NIE, which alleged
that Iran had halted its nuclear-weapons program in 2003 - while
acknowledging that the program could be restarted at any time.
In spite of "efforts to demonstrate that the new NIE did not prove that Iran
had given up its pursuit of nuclear weapons, just about everyone in the
world immediately concluded otherwise, and further concluded that this meant
the military option was off the table," Podhoretz writes.
Podhoretz, author of the new book "World War IV: The Long Struggle Against
Islamofascism," recounts a conversation he had with a member of America's
foreign-policy establishment.
"He took the position that there was really no need to stop [the Iranians]
in the first place, since even if they had the bomb they could be deterred
from using it, just as effectively as the Soviets and Chinese had been
deterred during the cold war.
"In response, I argued that deterrence could not be relied upon with a
regime ruled by Islamofascist revolutionaries who not only were ready to die
for their beliefs, but cared less about protecting their people than about
the spread of their ideology and their power."
With the NIE seemingly making it "politically impossible" for Bush to attack
Iran, Podhoretz says the U.S. could choose to "outsource" the job to Israel.
If the mullahs in Iran obtained nuclear weapons, a nuclear exchange with
Israel would become "inevitable," Podhoretz opines, and could even force
Israel to attack key Arab neighbors to prevent them from capitalizing on the
destruction wrought by the Iranian attack.
The resulting horrors would "be far greater than even the direst
consequences that might follow from bombing Iran before it reaches the point
of no return" and obtains the bomb, Podhoretz observes.
But he believes Israel, despite its military strength, would find it
difficult to adequately destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities - so "it is the
United States that will have to do the preventing, to do it by means of a
bombing campaign, and . to do it soon."
Unless we do, he concludes, "we had all better pray that there will be
enough time for the next president to discharge the responsibility that Bush
will have been forced to pass on, and that this successor will also have the
clarity and the courage to discharge it.
"If not - God help us all - the stage will have been set for the outbreak of
a nuclear war that will become as inescapable then as it is avoidable now."
