Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Condi Calls For Action Against Iran

Now that the world knows that Iran has uranium enrichment capabilities, the situation has become much more serious, and Condi knows it:

Denouncing Iran's successful enrichment of uranium as unacceptable to the international community, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday the U.N. Security Council must consider "strong steps" to induce Tehran to change course.

Rice also telephoned Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, to ask him to reinforce demands that Iran comply with its nonproliferation requirements when he holds talks in Tehran on Friday...

"It's time for action and that is what the secretary was expressing," Scott McClellan, the White House spokesman, said. "The president wanted to make sure that she made that very clear to all that were listening."

The Iranian situation must immediately be pushed to the forefront of our nation's discussion, and some form of action must be agreed on. A nuclear Iran is not something the United States would enjoy seeing, and the longer it goes without confronting the situation, the worse the problem will become.

The international community has shown a complete unwilligness to engage in any sort of confrontation with the Iranian regime, and we cannot rely on the U.N. to solve the problem. So far that body has done nothing but make empty threats, and weak ones at that. If we truly expect Iran to comply with the IAEA's regulations, then the duty falls upon the United States to make this happen.

Further warning will not suffice. President Ahmadinejad is as defiant as ever, and without any real threat of consequences for the actions of Iran, the country will not feel compelled in the least bit to behave differently. The obvious and very immediate suggestion is that we consider an invasion and regime change in Iran in the same we accomplished it in Iraq.

While many find this to be an unsavory suggestion, I can only stress that inaction now will mean greater action later. It will not be easy, and there will be casualties, but there is a far greater likelihood for more far-reaching casualties and suffering if we sit idle and allow Iran to go nuclear. And a nuclear Iran is a very, very bad thing for the United States.

Imagine a country ruled by Radical Islamic zealots that hates everything the west stands for, and has nuclear weapons that it can use if it so chooses. Consider the alliance that could emerge between that country and terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda that are comprised of individuals who are so impassioned they will give up their own lives to kill innocent Americans. Obviously, the nuclear arsenal of the country in question could very easily find its way into the hands of these terrorists, at which point America is in deep trouble.

Military action against Iran begins to appear as the only appropriate solution to the dilemma. As of now, this is not what the President is advocating. Currently he favors heavy trade embargoes and sanctions to punish Iran economically, thinking that if we cripple Iran's resources the costs will be too great to attempt to go nuclear. This may or may not be the case.

In the case that it isn't, military action is the only answer left. In any case, inaction is not the answer we need. Failure to act will only worsen the problem exponentially. The bottom line is that there must be debate and dicussion in this country --right now-- about how to handle Iran, and a decision must be reached quickly.


Hugh Hewitt has a very extensive and must-read post on the arguments against invading Iran. In it, he notes that the majority of the arguments being made by the left against an invasion are wrong or unfounded. The most provocative argument they have going for them is that there exists an action short of military invasion that can achieve our desired result with Iran. I think extremely harsh economic punishments have a possibility to be this action, but in the end I think Iran is just too driven to let that stop them.

To me, an invasion and regime change in Iran still remains the most viable option for keeping Iran from going nuclear. However, I continue to stress that what we need most at this moment is debate about our options in the situation, so that we may find the best possible way to keep our country safe.