Wasting Time With Alex

Bold admission that Iran going nuclear is bad..

Israel has had nuclear weapons now for a few decades, and short of the usual nutjob demanding the Jews be pushed into the sea and the land reclaimed, non of its Arab nations have ever felt the need to build nukes to protect themselves. As anyone that hasn’t been living under a rock knows, that sentiment has not been extended to Iran, a fellow traveler and the nation vying for the title of top Jew hater, which has nuclear ambitions. In fact, Iran’s Arab neighbors are all either contemplating nuclear programs of their own - something they never felt compelled to do to keep up with Israel, or flat out pointing out that only idiots think anything short of force will deter Iran at this point.

ASPEN, Colo. | The United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States said Tuesday that the benefits of bombing Iran’s nuclear program outweigh the short-term costs such an attack would impose. In unusually blunt remarks, Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba publicly endorsed the use of the military option for countering Iran’s nuclear program, if sanctions fail to stop the country’s quest for nuclear weapons. “I think it’s a cost-benefit analysis,” Mr. al-Otaiba said. “I think despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion … there will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country; that is going to happen no matter what.”

“If you are asking me, ‘Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran?,’ my answer is still the same: ‘We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.’ I am willing to absorb what takes place at the expense of the security of the U.A.E.” Mr. al-Otaiba made his comments in response to a question after a public interview session with the Atlantic magazine at the Aspen Ideas Festival here. They echo those of some Arab diplomats who have said similar things in private to their American counterparts but never this bluntly in public. The remarks surprised many in the audience.

Emphasis mine on that last bit. See, the only people surprised by this are the morons that also still believe talk can make a difference. That the problem here isn’t that Iran is run by destructive madmen, but that we (meaning that aggressive America of the Bush age) are the evil ones. This Ambassador has basically admitted that at least his country, the UAE, knows that nothing short of force will deter Iran at this point, and that Iran’s terror supporting/enabling leadership is pursuing these weapons so it can use the shield it will provide them, to escalate that support. And he has done it in public. He knows Iran will cause mayhem in this region if they go nuclear. Don’t take my word for this:

The ambassador also said that “talk of containment and deterrence really concerns me and makes me very nervous.” He said Iran has not been deterred from supporting terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah now, when it doesn’t have a nuclear arsenal. So why, he asked rhetorically, would Iran be more cautious in its support for terrorism if it did.

Exactly! Why does Iran need nukes if it has gotten away with this stuff already? The only thing that makes any kind of sense is that Iran plans to escalate, not reduce its efforts and the problems that its proxies are causing, and it thinks that nuclear umbrella will protect it from what happened to Saddam in Iraq or the Taliban in Afghanistan when they pushed us too hard. Does anyone doubt we would have handled these situations differently if we had to deal with a nuclear armed enemy? Thank Israel that Saddam didn’t have nukes. We might be thanking them too for Iran not having them sooner than later.

Of course, I am sure the usual leftards will now chime in that a nuclear enemy might have prevented Bush’s cowboy adventurism, and thus justify why we should let Iran go nuclear, but before you actually think these morons have a valid point, consider the following statement by the UAE ambassador:

Mr. al-Otaiba said that his country would be the last Arab country to cut a deal with Iran, if Tehran were to go nuclear. But he predicted other wealthy Arab states in the Gulf would dump their alliances with the U.S. in favor of ties with Tehran if President Obama does not stop the Islamic republic’s quest to become a nuclear power. “There are many countries in the region that if they lack assurance that the U.S. is willing to confront Iran, they will start running for cover with Iran,” he said. “Small, rich, vulnerable countries do not want to stick their finger in the big boy’s eye if they do not have the backing of the United States.”

Anyone thinking that this will result in more stability or lead to a better world is not just a moron, they are delusional. As I have often said, at a minimum you will get this:

Mr. al-Otaiba also said that an Iranian acquisition would set off a nuclear arms race in the region, predicting that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Turkey would all start nuclear programs if Iran acquired such weapons.

Your average ignorant moron would argue that there is nothing wrong with these countries going nuclear too, I am sure. After all, Pakistan and India did it. And we are even living with the Norks being a nuclear nation. Let me point out what this ambassador had to say about that…

The ambassador in the end stressed that his country would not tolerate a nuclear Iran. “The United States may be able to live with it,” he said. “We can’t.”

I think the US would not be able to live with it either, but then again, the people that think this way are also the ones that believed the USSR should have been the one to win the Cold War, America isn’t fit to be the world’s leader because it is the root of all evil, China would do a better job than the US if it was top dog, and that they are able to use talk to keep a nuclear armed Iran in line. No matter how this plays out, it is going to be ugly. The thing is, as this ambassador has pointed out, that a nuclear armed Iran will be much more costly than whatever crap we get if we prevent it by force.