If it’s for “peaceful purposes”, why hide it?

What’s wrong with Iran developing nuclear energy? After all, oil resources will be depleted one of these years. Why should we single Iran out to stop their nuclear development?

For example, last year Brazil announced their intention to revive their nuclear capability for peaceful purposes. Why didn’t the world seem to be concerned about that?

I would be all in favor of Iran developing a nuclear capability if it weren’t for a few small details:

1. Iran is an Islamic nation, the core of the Islamic world, practicing a form of Islam that has an avowed hatred of Jews and other infidels around the world.
2. Their leaders and many among their population have vowed to eradicate Israel; they deny its right to exist.
3. Their leaders and many of their people deny the holocaust ever existed; thus they are deniers of reality.
4. They have hidden their nuclear facilities in attempts to keep their efforts secret.
5. They have resisted world demands for inspections and have not been forthcoming with their program.
6. They are concurrently developing a medium and long range missile system capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Their Shahab-5 missile is capable of delivering a warhead a distance of 5,500 km or 3,400 miles, far enough to reach most of Europe with a 1,500 pound warhead. It’s a bit disconcerting to note that there is little information on the internet on the Shahab 5 and 6 later than the early part of this decade. Even Russia is suspicious of Iran’s intent.
7. They have every motivation to deliver nuclear weapons by unconventional means (suitcase or truck bombs) to further the Islamic terror campaign.

Aside from these problems, sure Iran, go right ahead. The problem with world sanctions is that they tend to be too little too late, and unenforced. Their nuclear facilities and “will to pursue nuclear” should have been eradicated several years ago.

Here’s more on Iran’s new “secret” nuclear facility on Atlas Shrugs.

What democracy accomplishes in the middle east...

In August 2005, January 2006, July 2007, and January 2009 I expressed concern and dismay at US attempts to invoke “democracy” in Iraq or any Islamic nation – because the dominance of Islam prevents any ongoing success.

It appears that Robert Spencer, author of the Jihad Watch web site, has a similar history of skepticism. He leads through the chronology that results in the most likely outcome:

"Iraq will be a colony of Iran"

Well, I hate to say I told you so, but...

June 27, 2006: "Of course, Ahmadinejad may be jumping the gun a bit as far as that is concerned, but he is certainly doing all he can to bring into being a Shi'ite client state in Iraq."

September 13, 2006: "Here we see looming in Iraq the Shi'ite client state of Iran that the U.S. has unwittingly helped put into place with its short-sighted democracy project."

October 31, 2006: "Is al-Maliki on the road to creating the Shi'ite client state that the Iranians have been trying to foster in Iraq for quite some time now?"

February 11, 2007: "Iran continues its efforts to create a Shi'ite client state in Iraq."

June 10, 2008: "Or are U.S. troops the main obstacle to Iraq's becoming a full-fledged client state of Iran?"

November 12, 2008: "Very soon now the President of the United States and the President of Iran will sit down, without preconditions, and hash this out, and clear everything up before Iraq turns fully into the Shi'ite client state that the Iranians covet."

July 1, 2009: "Their goal of creating a Shi'ite client state is closer than ever to being realized."

July 30, 2009: "Was this what we have been fighting for in Iraq all these years? An Iranian Shi'ite client state in Baghdad?"

Looks like it. But of course, the learned analysts knew better.

"Behind the Carnage in Baghdad," by David Ignatius in the Washington Post, August 25 (thanks to Kamala):

As security deteriorates in Baghdad, there's a new cause for worry: The head of the U.S.-trained Iraqi National Intelligence Service (INIS) has quit in a long-running quarrel with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki -- depriving that country of a key leader in the fight against sectarian terrorism.

Gen. Mohammed Shahwani, the head of Iraqi intelligence since 2004, resigned this month because of what he viewed as Maliki's attempts to undermine his service and allow Iranian spies to operate freely. The CIA, which has worked closely with Shahwani since he went into exile in the 1990s and has spent hundreds of millions of dollars training the INIS, was apparently caught by surprise by his departure.

The chaotic conditions in Iraq that triggered Shahwani's resignation are illustrated by several recent events -- each of which suggests that without the backstop of U.S. support, Iraqi authorities are now desperately vulnerable to pressure, especially from neighboring Iran....

Iran's links with Maliki are so close, said this Iraqi intelligence source, that the prime minister uses an Iranian jet with an Iranian crew for his official travel. The Iranians are said to have sent Maliki an offer to help his Dawa Party win at least 49 seats in January's parliamentary elections if Maliki will make changes in his government that Iran wants....

Should the Americans try to restore order? The top Iraqi intelligence source answered sadly that it was probably wiser to "stay out of it and be safe." When pressed about what his country would look like in five years, absent American help, he answered bluntly: "Iraq will be a colony of Iran."

Iranian election, will of the people, & Hillary

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won another rigged Presidential election in Iran. The Ayatollah has so decreed.

And here is what Secretary of State Hillary had to say about it:

"The United States has refrained from commenting on the election in Iran. We obviously hope that the outcome reflects the genuine will and desire of the Iranian people..."

Isn't that like saying "I hope the people of Iran want to obliterate Israel" because that is the outcome of this election. The outcome, rigged or not, is that the proponent of obliterating Israel and developing nuclear weapons to carry out that intent won the election. And Hillary hopes this outcome reflects the genuine will and desire of the Iranian people. We know for certain the outcome represents the genuine will and desire of many Iranians. How many we may never know.

Yes, she could have intended the meaning differently, as in hoping a different outcome had occurred to reflect the true will of the people. But this is not the way the words came out. What a mealy mouthed, wishy washy, pandering thing she said.

And why "refrain...from commenting on the election?" How laid back should we be in this matter? What's the matter Hillary and Barack, cats' got your tongue?

How about calling a spade a spade and proclaim a rigged election against the will of the people and against the best interests of the entire middle east region?

Would that be too much to ask?

Middle East Heading South

President B. H. Obama and the Iraqi government have assured Iraq is a lost cause for the western world. This article describes how the unmotivated Iraqi government is dropping the ball on the hand-off of the US counterinsurgency initiatives. With the inevitable withdrawal of US troops in the next 18 months to 2 years, this Iraqi government predisposition to revert to the past will spell perpetual conflict and tribal anarchy until the next dictator or Sharia-endowed leader rises up.

While I'm about predicting things in the middle east, here are four more predictions that will be like watching a slow motion train wreck over the next several years:

Afghanistan: Afghanistan has already been described as Obama's Vietnam. In two years, we will tire of that mire and decide there are other actions we can take to deceive ourselves into believing that we are being productive at achieving whatever objective we have over there. Within four years, we will be out of Afghanistan whether there is lasting reduction of Al-Qaeda influence or not.

Pakistan: A nuclear-armed nation on the brink of revolution. What to do. What to do. We won't do enough. We will not safeguard the nukes. We will not prevent a radical Islamic takeover. There is now "galloping Talibanization" occurring in Pakistan. Within two years, we will resign ourselves to a west-hating controlled Pakistan who will effectively use it's nuclear power to coerce western influence-reducing concessions out of us. Obama will do whatever it takes to minimize their hatred toward us. We can expect an increasing number of Kum-bay-Yah moments from B. Hussein O. in the middle east.

Iran: The US will be effective in preventing Isreal from destroying Iran's nuclear facilities. UPDATE: During todays' (Tuesday, May 18) meeting between Obama and Netanyahu, Obama effectively neutralized any Israelli action against Iran by guaranteeing another 8 months of talk with Iran. See here and here. Here is one example of Obama's arm twisting. If Obama simply wanted notice from Israel to ready or protect American troops in the area, he would have said this privately - as in "Top Secret". This public demand was a political move to further distance himself from Israel and further cozy up to Muslim nations. Netanyahu will become a paper tiger. Again, within two years, we will resign ourselves to being subject to an Islamic, nuclear-armed Iran who will effectively use it's nuclear power to coerce western influence-reducing consessions out of us.

Israel: If two out of three of these predictions materialize, Israel's existence is in doubt in 4 years. Islamic dominance in Europe and the US will accelerate.

I hope I am dead wrong on all of them.

Uncanny resemblance to eBay fraud e-mail...

The Iranians will be much more successful in their deceitful ways when they master English. A familiar feeling of Post eBay Stress Syndrome Trauma (PESST) came over me after I read this alleged letter from a British marine after he was captured by their truthful and honest Islamic Iranian host...

"We entered Iranian waters without permission and we were detained by Iranian coast guards. I would like to apologize for this to the Iranian people," the agency quoted him as saying.
"Since our detention on March 23, everything has been very good and I'm completely satisfied about the situation."

The English is exactly as I experienced from a scamming Iranian buyer (who claimed to be from Nigeria - yes, that should have been my first clue) complete with their plural of the wrong words ("guards") and the soothing tone of "everything is very good and I'm completely satisfied about the situation."

This quote just has to be plagerized from an Iranian eBay scam script.