Iran, The General And Rationality

The President said today, in essence, that the military option would be on the table “if Iran produces a nuclear weapon”. The President’s always careful phrasing would indicate that when Iran does in fact produce a nuclear weapon, then and only then would a military option be on the table. You can be assured that is how Iran will gleefully interpret the President’s comments. Students of the situation might, in a fit of pique, label the President’s comments as irrational.

The combination of leaks by Mr. Panetta predicting an Iranian action against us in the spring, a stick in the Israeli eye by General Dempsey, the lack of support for the Iranian Green Movement, IAEA’s now frantic reporting and a constant drumbeat, attempting to beat Israel into self destructive submission all combine to make one wonder if Mr. Obama is actually concerned about the Iranian nuclear program.

The belief has long existed in European diplomatic circles that we can ‘live with’ an Iranian bomb. Europeans are firm in their belief that they can ‘live with’ almost anything, except of course Greece. The Europeans are not given to confrontation even in the event of their comprehensive failure to effectively negotiate with Iran. Saudi Arabia does not believe they can ‘live with’ an Iranian bomb. Their Pakistani surrogates have gotten the message; be ready to deliver a Saudi bomb as payback for early support of the Pakistani nuclear program. The Saudi’s unlike General Dempsey don’t believe the Iranians to be’ rational’ actors.

General Dempsey, however, labels Iran a ‘rational actor’. He went on in his testimony insisting that to assume Iran was irrational would be to underestimate them. Perhaps it’s about definitions. Our august Senate Budget Committee members did not press the General on his definition of rationality and therein lay the problem; definitions. Definitions are the foundation of any message; failure to address and clarify them is to deliver a weak message, which we have done, again.

The General’s definition of rationality would accept worldwide support of terrorism as rational. You accept that terror is a means to an end; by applying it as a self validating tactic it is, therefore rational. You accept an apocalyptic, end of days belief system that demands chaos and war as a necessary prelude to the global ascent of the next messiah as rational. When we encounter such cultish beliefs in America, they are immediately labeled as irrational, a product of misguided fringe beliefs. In the case of Iran however, where such beliefs guide the governing political infrastructure, the good General must believe such beliefs to be rational if his analysis follows his logic.

When the Supreme Leader and the President of Iran speak publically of being in ‘direct contact’ with the missing 12th Imam, he, the object of apocalyptic prophecy, dead or missing for centuries, the General’s logic demands that we must accept these guiding beliefs as rational.

The General is not alone; Foreign Affairs Magazine published an article some time ago contending that while we cannot contain Iran now, but that we actually could contain Iran once they get the bomb. You want the twisted logic of irrationality, there you have it.

  • YeahRight

    Yeah, Lets get in there like we did in Iraq! I mean Iraq DID have weapons of massive destruction. Right? We blew up Iraqi cities, towns, and neighborhoods, but they had WMD’s. Right? We killed 1/2 million INNOCENT Iraqi children, women, and elderly, and left the others mentally scarred but they had WMD’s. Right?
    Lets do same [blind sheople] thing again in IRAN! Forget WMDs! Let go with “ASSUMPTION” they’re an eye blink away from nuclear weapons! [wink wink] LETS blow up destroy more town, cities, and neighborhoods on an ASSUMPTION! Yeah, kill 1/2 million MORE children, women, and elderly, plus mentally scar 10’s of millions more. They’re just brown muslims anyway! SURE it will cost more American SONS and DAUGHTERS their lives, chucks of their part parts, and live has robocops, but Israel will love us! That’s all that matters!

  • D.D.Mao

    Landreaux:

    Two thoughts come to my mind as I read this that I would like your input on.

    Makes you wonder if President Obama will attempt to tell Isreali Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to NOT take out any nuclear facilities until AFTER THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS during their meetings this week.

    Just what does the words “If Iran produces a nuclear weapon” mean when the American left dilly-dallyed when it came to needing proof of WMD in Iraq.

    File this under LMAO: I find it ironic that on the screen Landreaux wrote about the nuclear threat from Iran there is an advertisement about “International Muslim Matrimonials”.

  • DD,

    Netanyahu is faced with a problem here politically. First and foremost there is no question in my mind that he will NOT allow Iran to proceed to a nuclear weapon. We have to assume with some significant justification Israeli intelligence is better and likely long embedded in Iran. Given our intelligence structure’s current orientation toward being influenced politically I would trust Israel’s estimates more than our own. Second, an international crisit resulting from an attack on Iran could, could spur a cricical number of voters to stay with the existing President in the interest of continuity.

    ‘If Iran get’s nuclear weapons’ is, I believe, exactly what the President says. No attack unless proof is had that a nuclear weapon exists. The Administration’s position has been clear and consistent. I believe it’s wrong but it’s been consistent.

    After 7 years of engagement we finally get to a sanctions regime we could have put in place years ago. Iran brilliantly played for time and they are still doing so. I believe they are willing to sacrafice their economy to get to the finish line. I would opine that the willingness to sacrafice their economy is the best proof that they are closer than U.S. analysists say they are.

    One thing we know for sure, Netanyahu will not be intimidated and will not agree to anything that he does not feel is in Israel’s interests.

    Additionally, many who watch the situation closely know that Israel’s policy regarding use of their nuclear capabilities is predicated on the potential for being ‘overrun’. ‘Overrun’ can be interperted in a variety of ways and an Iranian nuclear weapon could be one of them.

    You can be sure that as Israel evaluates contingencies use of a low yield weapon is one of them. Hard to fathom what those consequences could be but it is one of their capabilities.

  • Bill Hedges

    YeahRight says “We killed 1/2 million INNOCENT Iraqi children, women, and elderly, and left the others mentally scarred…” I didn’t know that. Give link so I may learn.

    As far as WMD, Democrats believed long before G.W. Bush. Iraq, with their WMD, killed massive number of “INNOCENT Iraqi children, women, and elderly, and left the others mentally scarred”.

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

    http://www.iraqwatch.org/profiles/chemical.html

  • D.D.Mao

    Landreaux:

    Prime Minister Netanyahu received the back of President Obama’s hand to many times for him to believe he could rely on him backing Isreal.President Obama is only looking as far as the next election and if anyone should receive an apology from President Obama it should be Bibi.

    Always enjoy reading the latest from someone who has their finger on the pulse on whats happening in the Middle East.Thanks!

  • D.D.Mao

    Yeah Right!:

    Obviously from his actions in the past three years your President doesn’t care a twatle if Isreal loves us or not only as long as he doesn’t lose the American Jewish vote come November.

    Lastly if you wish to continue this discussion you will have to do better than relying on the “They’re just brown Muslims” attack line.That tactic is only used by “blind sheople” followers of the left……….D.D.M.

  • Bill Hedges

    DD Mao

    you relied on unproven line that Cain cheated on his wife. Then you denied. Faced with your own words, you ignored.

    Guess YeahRight is entitled just like you to use ““blind sheople” followers of the left” do…

  • YeahRight

    Hey Bill does “Shock & Awe” ring a bell? Ever though about what its like to wear the shoes of those Iraqis who survived the initial bombings, and many others afterwards? Tell me if you lived in the recieving side of those neighborhoods wouldn’t you feel same mental/psychological [shell] shock that could [more than likely did] permentally scar them [you] for the rest of their [your] life?
    Oh, but that is over there! You know, the other side of the world. Plus, isn’t it a good thing that our main stream media blackouts all the civilian dead and wound bodies. But hey we get latest clips on Lady Gaga’s outfits, and current twist on Kardashian’s relationships. THAT’s REAL NEWS!
    Which is why “…you don’t get it…”
    On another note – starting to worry about this Landreaux person. Israel HAS NOT signed on to any nuclear treaty or agreement, period! None! Zero! Nada! Not even America knows exactly how many war-heads or cruise missles they have. Unoffical count is around 240 to 244. So my question to Landreaux is, “If Israel DOES have 240 nuclear missles/war-heads, and they do, how is it that its NOT a deterrent to nations like Iran?” And if its NOT a deterrent “Why do they need their 240 or so nuclear missles then?” Obviously Israel is behaving like they’re NOT a deterrent! So why do they need them at all?

  • YeahRight,

    You are correct Israel has not signed on to any nuclear treaty. But that does not equal relativism between Israel and Iran. To the best of my knowledge Israel has not threatened genocide, Iran has. Israel has not funded global terrorism, Iran has. Israel does not support a dozen or so terrorism surrogates, Iran does. Israel does not supress religions other than Judism, Iran does. The only place in the Middle East where Arabs and Muslims can participate in a mature democracy is in Israel, that has beent he case for many decades.

    I know the Arab line regarding Israeli terrorism, but they use self defense as a definition of terrorism. It’s all about definitions and who’s you accept.

    In terms of detterent, it’s not just Israel that may provide such a detterent. If you follow Secretary Clinto she intends to provide substantial portions of the Middle East with a U.S. nuclear shield. The offers have been made publically. I would point out that deterrence is very much a state of mind adopted by ‘rational’ actors. Russia and the U.S. were ‘rational’ actors during the cold war. The consequence of a nuclear confrontation was recognized by both and therefore…..deterence.

    The queston of deterrence regarding Iran revolves around their status as a rational actor and I would argue, with some significant evidence, that by our standards they are not.

  • D.D.Mao

    Landreaux:

    I read in Sundays Washington Com-Post that the “Muslim Brotherhood has formed a political party in Libya after six years in the shadows under the rule of Moammar Gaddafi. The Islamist group declared the formation of the Justice and Development Party on Saturday.The Brotherhood faces competition from more hard lined Islamist groups but is viewed as the most organized Libyan movement with a national presence.”

    Any insight you can give on this as to who their leader might be etc.?

  • D.D.Mao

    Bill:

    Using your twisted logic “Yeah Right” then doesn’t have to provide you with links to justify his remarks made about us killing half a million innocent Iraqi women and children.After all according to your 4th March @ 11:35 post he is “ENTITLED” being only a “blind sheople” of the left.

    Move on!

  • DD

    I would have to go into my research files to ID the names of leadership, what I can tell you is the the Brotherhool will likely be in control from Tunesia to Eqypt and accross the entirity of North Africa. Likely Syria and eventually Jordan. They are already closly affiliated with Hamas. They serve as the Strategic Braintrust of Islamism throughtout the Muslim World.

    Their spiritual guide is Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi who also happens to have the most popular program in al Jazzera. See MEMRI for translations, they are more than a little scary.

    The Brotherhood is NOT to be underestimated. Their U.S. affiliates include CAIR, the Muslim Students Association and a variety of other organizations.

    DO NOT buy the main stream media’s representations of the Brotherhood as ‘moderate’. What they say in Arabic is vastly different than what they say in English, French or German.

  • Bill Hedges

    Landreaux

    Thousands upon thousands of unguided rockets are hurled into Israel. Year after year. What restraint BY JEWISH STATE. As YeahRight says, “who survived the initial bombings, and many others afterwards?” DICTATOR killed large numbers in Iraq.

    DD Mao

    “Twisted” something ? You stated awhile back Cain cheated on his wife. Something I read often on liberal site I frequent. I called you on saying that. You denied saying it. So I posted your remarks. Let me refresh your memory:

    “Capitalism Under Attack?”

    “Bill Hedges Jan 13th, 2012 at 11:10 pm
    D.D. Mao

    In “Mitt Needed Newt” D.D.Mao Jan 13th, 2012 at 12:54 am wrote “A BETTER QUESTION TO ASK IS….Why should Mr. Gingrich get a pass when Mr. Herman Cain paid the price for his womanizing?”

    D.D. Mao this does not sound like your latest explanation. D.D.Mao Jan 13th, 2012 at 4:32 pm:

    “Yes Mr. Cains womanizing was “speculation” HOWEVER THE KEY WORDS HERE WAS PRESIDENT EISENHOWER AND ROOSEVELT WAS SPECULATED “YEARS LATER” NOT WHEN THEY WERE RUNNING.I nver said Mr. Cain was guilty of womanizing only that it done him in”

    Saying “Mr. Herman Cain paid the price for his womanizing?” is not the same as saying “I nver said Mr. Cain was guilty of womanizing only that it done him in”. Your HIGH MORALS failed you, so you RE-WRITE your history to try and save face…

    I thought it was fitting using your “blind sheople” with YeahRight. You claim such HIGH MORALS. My point was clear and made without his response being necessary. Which is the proper way to write. OJ was found innocent of murder because OJ knew how to make the gloves NOT FIT. A bad move in court SET HIM FREE. DNA too new. Some bad evidence handling, etc..

    DD Mao_ “Move on!” You can. I’ll do as I please. I monitor your comments… Enjoy…

  • D.D.Mao

    Bill:

    In the thread “Capitalism Under Attack” I gave you an answer to what you are referring.I’m sure you have better things to do with your time than your obsession with Mr.Cains character ……like trying to revive Mr.Gingrich’s campaign.

    The merry go round is closed!

  • Bill Hedges

    Yes DD Mao you gave a answer. You misrepresented the charter of Cain. I hope you did not do so for racial reasons. Though I can not come up with any rational reason. Evidence against Cain was HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE. You showed you will lie when confronted with your own words. You have high morals hidden from view if they truly do exist.

    First you say “Move on!”. Now “The merry go round is closed!”. With your vile and contemptible side showing I can’t hardly blame you for wanting to leave your true nature in the dark without floodlight illuminating them. Would have been more honest & noble for you to admit you were wrong to call Cain a womanizer, than you try to double talk your mistake. You know, take the HIGH GROUND.

    At least Newt passed last civil rights bill, reformed welfare, reduced government SPENDING, balanced budget, and reduced National Debt. To my knowledge you back NOBODY. NOBODY IS to your STARDARDS ? Has anybody ever been ? Even Abe Lincoln ? He used a drunkard General who won battles. Can’t use wife cheaters and drunks !!??!! DD Mao has HIGH STANDARDS so he says…

  • Bill Hedges

    HIGH STANDARDS even than GOD…

  • Bill Hedges

    Correction in Bill Hedges Mar 7th, 2012 at 11:42 pm

    Character not “charter”…

  • D.D.Mao

    Bill:

    In regard to your concern over my “High Standards” I refer you to Thomas Jefferson:

    “A man whose political principles have any decided character and who has energy enough to give them effect must always expect to encounter political hostility from those of adverse principles.”

    In regard to your concern over my vetting Mr.Gingrich I refer you to James Madison:

    “That in no case ought the eyes of the people be shut to the conduct of those entrusted with power nor their tongues tied from a just wholesome censure.”

  • Bill Hedges

    Yes Newt faced “political hostility from those of adverse principles.” From the previous Speaker Newt opposed to Bill C.’s action.

    You claimed your SO CALLED HIGH STANRARD from your parents. Though I caught you LYING. “Adverse principles” has nothing to do with it. Is your L I E S.

    As stated in earlier times, God used Moses even though Moses had a mistress. I put GOD over James Madison. Though public were ignorant Presidests with checkered lives have served our Country well.

    Lying as you did is unforgiveable. Newt admitted cheating and balanced budget, reduced debt, etc.. Things we need in our President. A. Licoln said give same brand of booze to all his Generals that Grant drinks. Gtant wins battles.

    Neither ““Move on!” nor “The merry go round is closed!” as you said. You simple try to twist away from fact that YOU LIED…

  • Bill Hedges

    CORRECTIONS

    Not “STANRARD” but standard. Spelled President and Grant…

  • D.D.Mao

    Bill:

    As long as you are calling people liars didn’t you say in the “Capitalism Under Attack” thread(31 January @9:09 PM)that you were going to direct all your future messages to Landreaux?

    YOUR ADVENTURE IN TRIVIALITY MERRY GO ROUND IS CLOSED!

  • Bill Hedges

    DD Mao

    Changing ones mind is not lying ___ Pitiful try ___. Denying you said Cain cheated on his wife IS LYING. Stay focus and use your brain. Is common sense.

    You neither “Move on!” nor “The merry go round is closed!”. Now you say “YOUR ADVENTURE IN TRIVIALITY MERRY GO ROUND IS CLOSED!” . “TRIVIALITY” must mean I won’t stop repeating you lied and nothing you say will stray me from repeating it. You run out of ways to clear yourself. So insult the messenger ___ A liberal tactic ___. Save the argument you have HIGH MORALS. That idea HAS BEEN GROUNDED. That plane is inoperable…