Pakistan? Iran?
Which will it be? Which of these countries will be the first to make weapons of mass destruction available to the Taliban and/or al Qaeda?
At the moment, my bet is on Pakistan since it is moving quickly toward a state of anarchy with the Taliban growing in strength daily. But, Iran is close on its heels as it works to develop its own nuclear weapons capability. And Iran will be only too happy to export that terrorist tool, if it doesn't use those weapons first to annihilate Israel.
We see these two states and we wonder what the United States is doing about these threats. Not much as it turns out. Our State Department is talking as State Departments always do. Our president has openly courted "discussions" with Iran's leadership. He has also told us that we know where the Pakistani's keep their nuclear weapons and that we'll go in and get those under control before the Taliban can get their hands on the weapons.
Except, that was a lie; we don't know where those weapons are stored, and we'll not be able to go in and take control before the Taliban find the essential pieces and the know-how to assemble the final weapons.
We have removed forces from Iraq so that Obama could keep a campaign promise and we now see that raids are on the increase there suggesting that we moved too soon and that we could see the hard-won peace derailed. We moved those few troops into the Afghanistan/Pakistan region but those are likely too few to do much good.
We have already made defense budget decisions that have significant implications for our military capabilities in the near and far terms.
Possibly the greater question is one of will. Do we have the will to contain future explosions around the world or will we try to talk our way out of trouble before we do anything substantive to end it? Will we use the "gift" of Obama and talk our way through these problems? Will we have the military wherewithal to defend our interests around the world? Or, will we even recognize that we have interests around the world?
Secretary Gates is the only person on Obama's team who has experience and his will seems to be in question at this point. Secretary Clinton has no foreign affairs experience even though she is working very hard and showing the haggard looks to prove that. We do not have the institutional experience at the highest levels nor do we seem to have the inclination to listen to those who would provide counsel to the President.
All the while, we are introverted and focused almost solely on re-working our country from a capitalist structure to a socialist structure.
A new day has dawned, and it is frightening.
At the moment, my bet is on Pakistan since it is moving quickly toward a state of anarchy with the Taliban growing in strength daily. But, Iran is close on its heels as it works to develop its own nuclear weapons capability. And Iran will be only too happy to export that terrorist tool, if it doesn't use those weapons first to annihilate Israel.
We see these two states and we wonder what the United States is doing about these threats. Not much as it turns out. Our State Department is talking as State Departments always do. Our president has openly courted "discussions" with Iran's leadership. He has also told us that we know where the Pakistani's keep their nuclear weapons and that we'll go in and get those under control before the Taliban can get their hands on the weapons.
Except, that was a lie; we don't know where those weapons are stored, and we'll not be able to go in and take control before the Taliban find the essential pieces and the know-how to assemble the final weapons.
We have removed forces from Iraq so that Obama could keep a campaign promise and we now see that raids are on the increase there suggesting that we moved too soon and that we could see the hard-won peace derailed. We moved those few troops into the Afghanistan/Pakistan region but those are likely too few to do much good.
We have already made defense budget decisions that have significant implications for our military capabilities in the near and far terms.
Possibly the greater question is one of will. Do we have the will to contain future explosions around the world or will we try to talk our way out of trouble before we do anything substantive to end it? Will we use the "gift" of Obama and talk our way through these problems? Will we have the military wherewithal to defend our interests around the world? Or, will we even recognize that we have interests around the world?
Secretary Gates is the only person on Obama's team who has experience and his will seems to be in question at this point. Secretary Clinton has no foreign affairs experience even though she is working very hard and showing the haggard looks to prove that. We do not have the institutional experience at the highest levels nor do we seem to have the inclination to listen to those who would provide counsel to the President.
All the while, we are introverted and focused almost solely on re-working our country from a capitalist structure to a socialist structure.
A new day has dawned, and it is frightening.
Posted by The Curmudgeon at 5/5/2009 6:58 AM 
Categories: Politics,Quality of Life,Terrorism,National Issues
Categories: Politics,Quality of Life,Terrorism,National Issues
On what concrete evidence do you base your statement that "Iran will be only too happy to export that terrorist tool, if it doesn't use those weapons first to annihilate Israel" ?
According to the most recent National Intelligence Estimate (http://www.inss.org.il/research.php?cat=3&incat=&read=2754 )
there is no evidence that Iran has restarted its nuclear weapons making program since it halted operations in 2003. Further, there has been absolutely no evidence that Iran has any intention to "export" nuclear technology. Iran views possession of nuclear weapons as a vital national security issue, not as a means to supply rogue terrorist groups. Iran is a stable state with every interest in self-preservation. There is no reason to believe the Iranian government has interest in putting that in jeopardy. Ahmadinejad's anti-Israeli comments have not intimated military aggression towards the Jewish state, only Iran's view that the Israeli settlements are the result of a series of illegal land-grabs, beginning with the 1947 UN resolution 181 creating Israel. Further, Israeli PM Netanyahu has served up many disparaging remarks towards Iran, including comparing the nation to Germany circa 1938.
Your baseless commentary on the Iranian nuclear issue is yet another example of the avalanche of misinformation that perpetuates in the American media circus. Until we (Westerners, and specifically Americans) begin to listen to the rest of the, inform our opinions, and deal in facts and truth rather than pushing agendas and spinning hyperbole there is little hope for an improved climate of international relations.
Reply to this