The dispute which President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu failed to resolve during their sit down earlier this week revolved around what the red line should be that outside powers would forbid Iran from crossing.
Prime Minister Netanyahu says Iran must not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapons capability. President Obama disagrees, and insists the red line should instead be actual Iranian production of nuclear weapons. That Obama would allow an Iranian nuclear weapons capability, however, is akin to allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons.
Iran, the White House suggests, should be allowed to become like Japan, a state that has all the technology to put together a nuclear weapon but simply has not chosen to do so. Never mind that Iran is not Japan, and that the two states have very different ideologies. Cultural and moral relativism, however popular they may be in this administration, should never mean turning a blind eye toward an enemy achieving superior weapons technology just because an ally has it.
American policymakers have used the red line controversy to delude themselves into believing that intelligence reports which suggest Iran has yet to make a decision to develop nuclear weapons means the West still has time to allow diplomacy to work. The problem is that once Iran develops nuclear weapons capability—a capability which the IAEA suggests they aim to achieve—it would only take a few days to develop nuclear weapons.
Red lines are important, but so too is a basic understanding of the Iranian threat. Obama may mesmerize progressives with his rhetoric, but sometimes charisma is not enough to cover up basic facts. By defining red lines where he does, Obama is acknowledging he is prepared to see Iran develop nuclear weapons. That is not in the U.S. national interest, and it is disingenuous for Obama to suggest otherwise.
Amazing how the line has been moved so that Iran is allowed to have the nuclear capability but cannot, absolutely, positively, no, no, no, no, no, cannot be allowed to have *actual* nukes ready to use against Israel (or the U.S. for that mater). n nThis is utter madness on the scale of 1938-39! We have a mad Regime in Tehran that has a clearly and gleefully enunciated its plan to take out Israel; has a long and varied history of carrying out terror attacks itself and through proxies; has been busy developing all the components necessary to produce and (menacingly) *deliver* nukes; has an unreasoning, utter and unwavering hate for the Jew and Infidel Great Satan. n nHow exactly is the U.S. going to positively and reliably verify that Iran has crossed the line into actually possessing nukes rather than *merely* developing them? When Iran conducts an underground nuclear test? Sorry, it looks like they have already done that via their mad partner, North Korea (according to the recent article in the German paper, Die Welt). Short of a signature nuclear test in Iranian territory, does anyone have any confidence that U.S. intelligence — the same intel that provided the partisan assessment that Iran had stopped its nuke program in 2003– is going to produce the proverbial smoking gun to prove possession of nukes by Iran? n nThe sad reality is that Iran must surely be game-planning this already and will certainly have at least a handful of nukes safely hidden and ready for use by the time the U.S. gets anywhere close to taking military action. At that point, what is the U.S. going to do? Does anyone think that Obama (or even a President Romney) would authorize military action where Iran clearly has the nukes with which to retaliate? The horse is out of the barn at that point and it is far too late to bar the door. This is just madness. n nIsrael has no choice but to take a swing at Iran in the very near future. God help us all if they don't.