No Nukes For Nutcakes!
Without Russia and China, no UN agreement to do something significant will stand, and without something significant -- really significant -- Ahmadinijad is not about to stop his holy quest for a nuclear weapon.
Sanctions? Iran's got plenty of oil, plenty of food, and plenty of will to snub its nose at sanctions. Petro-thirsty China would not likely agree to an Iranian oil embargo, so Iran will continue to have money.
In the face of this complex situation, the NYTimes editorial page wrings its hands. It sees the threat, and it's scared. But it's not logical, because there's this:
And it is worth recalling that the ill-fated invasion of Iraq was first sold to the American public as the most promising way to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of terrorists and terrorist-friendly states.Gosh. Anybody see any weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Saddam or his terrorist friends? I'd say the approach worked pretty darn well in Iraq. And Libya. And Pakistan. And Afghanistan (no big deal there, though -- yak dung-fired nukes are still a ways away).
The Iraq war is also having its effect in Iran. Citizens there are seeing increasing repression at home and increasing freedom next door. That's good, very good.
The leaders of Iran are aware that we know they're responsible for the deaths of many of our soldiers in Iraq, and while they're gleeful about it, they should not underestimate our resolve -- and, this time around, the resolve of Germany and France. (For PR purposes, if not military.)
We've probably got a bit more time to talk and pass resolutions. We've probably got a bit more time to let Iran ignore those resolutions. And then, time needs to run out for Ahbadinijad and his Mullah buddies.
No nukes for nutcakes!