The manner in which talk of going to war with Iran is being bandied about this election cycle, might lead an observer to conclude such an act would have consequences no more serious than a family squabble over the Holiday dinner table. As Pat Buchanan noted in his column here at Townhall.com yesterday, some war advocates, such as David Rothkopf, suggest that a so-called “surgical strike” against Iranian nuclear facilities and its consequences, would last no longer than “a day or two at most” and would be without any “civilian casualties.”
In diplomacy, always leave your adversary an honorable avenue of retreat.
With the focus of the presidential race turning sharply toward foreign policy, the topic of Iran and competing visions for what to do about the rogue regime’s pursuit of nuclear weapons are likely to take center stage in the coming days.
We are used to hearing that America defends Israel. President Obama assures Israel that he has their back. That may be convincing talk in the `hood, but it rings hollow from this invertebrate administration to talk about anyone's back. Actually, we may have all that backward. It may well be that Israel that is defending us. Israel may yet prove America's Shield.
Netanyahu addressed the Iran threat in an interview with Candy Crowley.
In the dreary years of Depression and drift leading up to World War II, there was always a difference of perception between Britain and France about the Hitler threat. France wanted to strike Hitler when he marched into the Rhineland in 1936.
When there’s no good answer, people sometimes – actually often – try to obfuscate with false information. That surely was the case at the recent U.S. Court of Appeals hearing involving the terrorist designation of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran (PMOI/MEK). I was present during the hearing and was stunned with how the Government handled this case.
It was just a short clip on CNN. Reporter Erin Burnett recited some statistics that suggest Iran’s oil tankers are all tied up, that the Islamic Republic’s oil revenues have been hard hit.
This is an incredibly tenuous time in the Middle East.
Denouncing Republican "bluster" about war with Iran, President Obama went on the offensive Tuesday:
General Boykin and author Erick Stakelbeck sit down with Glenn Beck. The issues on the table: Israel, Iran and Nukes.
What are we to make of President Barack Obama's latest pronouncements about Iran's movement toward nuclear bombs? His tough talk might have had some influence on Iran a couple of years ago, when he was instead being kinder and gentler with the world's leading terrorist-sponsoring nation. Now his tough talk may only influence this year's election -- which may be enough for Obama.
Twenty-three years ago this week, Iran's self-appointed supreme leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, broadcast a religious edict declaring that author Salman Rushdie and his publishers were "hereby sentenced to death." The fatwa also called for "all the intrepid Muslims in the world" to "execute them quickly, wherever they find them."
Appearing alongside CIA Director David Petraeus before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence last week, James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, said of Iran: "We don't believe they've actually made the decision to go ahead with a nuclear weapon."