“We Must Bomb Iran”
Telegraph:
A senior foreign policy adviser to the Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani has urged that Iran be bombed using cruise missiles and “bunker busters” to set back Teheran’s nuclear programme by at least five years.
The tough message at a time of crisis between the United States and Iraq was delivered by Norman Podhoretz, one of the founders of neoconservatism, who has also imparted his stark advice personally to a receptive President George W. Bush.
“None of the alternatives to military action - negotiations, sanctions, provoking an internal insurrection - can possibly work,” said Mr Podhoretz.
“They’re all ways of evading the terrible choice we have to make which is to either let them get the bomb or to bomb them.”
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Mr Podhoretz said he was certain that bombing raids could be successful.
“People I’ve talked to have no doubt we could set it back five or 10 years. There are those who believe we can get the underground facilities as well with these highly sophisticated bunker-busting munitions.”
Although Mr Podhoretz said he did not speak for Mr Giuliani, the former New York mayor whom he briefs daily appears to have embraced at least the logic of his hard-line views.
During a visit to London last month, Mr Giuliani said Iran should be given “an absolute assurance that, if they get to the point that they are going to become a nuclear power, we will prevent them or we will set them back five or 10 years”.
Mr Podhoretz said: “I was very pleased to see him say that. I was even surprised he went that far. I’m sure some of his political people were telling him to go slow … I wouldn’t advise any candidate to come out and say we have to bomb - it’s not a prudent thing to say at this stage of the campaign.
But Mr Podhoretz’s 77 years and his position as a pre-eminent conservative foreign policy intellectual means he can not only think the unthinkable but say the unsayable.
“My role has simply been to say what I think,” he said, explaining that he takes part in weekly conference calls and is in daily email contact with the Giuliani campaign.
He is the most eminent of a clutch of uncompromisingly hawkish aides assembled by Mr Giuliani. They include Daniel Pipes, who opposes a Palestinian state and believes America should “inspire fear, not affection”, and Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official who has argued that Condoleezza Rice’s diplomacy is “dangerous” and signals American “weakness” to Teheran.
“Does Rudy agree with me?” Mr Podhoretz asked rhetorically. “I don’t know and I don’t wish to know.” But he added that “Rudy’s view of the war is very similar to mine.”
Mr Podhoretz’s thesis is that the war on terror is in fact World War Four and that the 42-year-long Cold War should be more properly described as World War Three.
Awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, America’s highest honour, by President George W. Bush in 2004, Mr Podhoretz later sought a rare one-on-on audience with the US commander-in-chief. They met in New York’s Waldorf Astoria hotel in the spring.
The author of the recent World War IV: the Long Struggle Against Islamofacsism spent about 35 minutes outlining his case for air strikes against Iran as Mr Bush’s then chief adviser Karl Rove took notes.
“Whether I had any effect on him I truly don’t know but I sure tried my best to persuade him,” he said.
“He was very cordial. He was warm. He listened. He occasionally asked a question as I made the case but he was truly poker faced.”
Mr Podhoretz left the meeting unshaken in his belief that Mr Bush would attack Iran before he leaves office.
“The spirit of the questions was not to try to refute or contradict what I was saying. I didn’t get any negative vibes.”
He said that now “the debate [over Iran] is secretly over and the people who are against military action are now preparing to make the case that we can live with an Iranian bomb”.
Neither Mr Bush nor Mr Giuliani, however, would countenance Teheran acquiring a nuclear weapon and either one would authorise military action once they were convinced Iran had passed the point of no return with its uranium enrichment programme.
“Unlike a ground invasion where you’ve got to mass hundreds of thousands of troops, it takes six months and everybody knows you’re mobilising, with air strikes, we’ve got three carriers in the region and a lot of submarines,” Mr Podhoretz said.
“I would say it would take five minutes. You’d wake up one morning and the strikes would have been ordered and carried out during the night. All the president has to do is say go.”
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
The dirty secret of all this is while Adm Mullen is talking the negotiations line, the US Air Force is replenishing their stocks of bunker busters…including the latest greatest version. I’m told the new stuff can penetrate a buried, hardened target up to 200ft. Iran’s nuclear sites will be hit until they are destroyed. The plan is on someone’s desk, it has been sufficiently war-gamed and is ready to be executed, whenever the President gives the green light.
“They’re all ways of evading the terrible choice we have to make which is to either let them get the bomb or to bomb them.”
Iran’s government has made their choices. The US and Israel, must now make theirs. Do we let Iran get the means to as they have stated repeatedly to “wipe Israel off the map” or do we stop them from acquiring those weapons?
Like the man said, “None of the alternatives to military action - negotiations, sanctions, provoking an internal insurrection - can possibly work.”
The apostates in Iran have been “asking for it” for a long time. Time for some payback. Payback for what they did to Bill Buckley, Col Higgins, The Marines in 1983, the ethnic cleansing of South Lebanon and the 200 troops that they have killed in Iraq.
And I want to see Syria shake in their boots when it happens. I’d love to see the supply lines to the Hizzies in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza suddenly be cut off, because Iran is too busy trying to fight the US and see their finances suddenly dry up, because Iran would be too busy trying to rebuild it’s shattered military-industrial complex.
October 26th, 2007 at 7:29 pmI like his style.
I like people talking about facts as they are, not as facts as they want them to be for political expediency.
I like the smell of air free of bullshit.
October 26th, 2007 at 7:37 pmThe bombing of Iran is long overdue. We owe them one big time. Slow to anger, but resolute when roused, let the wrath of the West be upon them.
October 26th, 2007 at 7:49 pmI’m okay with bombing Iran. I have two concerns, though….
#1 Putin licking their butt-holes. Who has the goods on who in that relationship? And what does it do for diplomacy?
#2 Can our military handle another “theater?” I’m asking, not insulting. (I really wanna know your opinions.)
October 26th, 2007 at 8:52 pmJust for a grin have one or two of our Boomers surface
October 26th, 2007 at 8:53 pmwhere IMANUTJOB can see and see if he gets the point.
They would only need to launch 1 MIRV
GW needs to be like Nike and
JUST DO IT!
October 26th, 2007 at 9:22 pmIf and when it comes to dropping ordnance, let’s not even consider a reconstruction program for that country.
And, if Syria’s Assad and Hezbollah in Lebanon rear their ugly heads, lob them a few to let them know that we know where they are and that they shouldn’t worry about their puppetmasters.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:26 pm“#1 Putin licking their butt-holes. Who has the goods on who in that relationship? And what does it do for diplomacy?”
Fuck Putin AND diplomacy. Seriously. When the Iranian fucks started helping to kill our boys in Iraq that die was cast.
“#2 Can our military handle another “theater?” I’m asking, not insulting. (I really wanna know your opinions.)”
The Air Force and Navy are barely engaged today and it wouldn’t take much more than that. Tell the Iranians if they mass troops on the Iraq border then all nuke bets are off. One or two would really put a funk on their parade.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:37 pmDan, Dan, the Infidel Man-
You are spot on, as usual. But what will be the catalyst to finally affect change? I know we’ve got SF and CIA embedded and doing their damnedest to churn up the intel to justify the impending first strike, but don’t you think we already have enough reason to bomb them? While we’ve been sitting on our hands for the last 30 years hoping and praying for revolt, it’s only served to give them the thing they need the most: time. (Using Cuba as a benchmark we should be smart enough to figure out that ain’t gonna happen.) Is Bush going to leave this mess for a possible Dem to try and clean up? I don’t get the hold up.
October 26th, 2007 at 9:56 pmLadyAngler:
#1 Putin licking their butt-holes. Who has the goods on who in that relationship? And what does it do for diplomacy?
Me: Putin will ally himself with anyone that is against America. Putin is all about power and money and influence.
He’s as corrupt as any member of the Russian mob is.
Diplomacy? Pardon me if I laugh…Like Putin or anyone else in the UN gives a damn about diplomacy. It’s all about money and anti-Americanism. Diplomacy is just more hudna.
#2 Can our military handle another “theater?” I’m asking, not insulting. (I really wanna know your opinions.)
Me: Yes it can. We’re already fighting Al-Quds in Iraq. The Israelis are fighting the Hizzies. The Iraniac proxies are aiding the Paki and Afghani insurgents too. The Iraniacs are already fighting us. And that’s their choice.
Diplomacy for Iran is all about buying time for their nuclear weapons program to hit critical mass. It’s a ploy.
And Russia and China know this too. So they’re just playing games.
The better question is can Iran sustain it’s operations in Iraq, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Pakistan, while taking a major hit to their NBC and military-industrial capabilities.
We got the means and the money to sustain an air war in Iran. Can they match us in money and sustainability while fighting in so many battle spaces, while their own people take huge economic hits on a daily basis?
My answer is no. They cannot. And yes we are more than capable of launching a sustained attack from the air and sea against Iran, and still support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I really think that the Iraniacs are stupid enough to try and take us on in a frontal assault on the battlefield. Yep, I believe that they’re that arrogant. No doubt that they might even try a chem-bio attack.
The end result: their missile batteries, AD, planes, military-industrial, nuclear, political structures AND their troops would be crushed.
The air war would take about 10 days of 24/7 round-the-clock shock-and-awe to achieve success.
Putin and China would whine, as would the lefties and anarchists both home and abroad…
In the meantime the Iraniac nuclear program would be set back 5 to ten years. The Iraniacs would look for revenge and we’d just end up killing them in larger numbers than we are right now.
And if the Israelis launch a strike against the hizzies in Lebanon, while we’re busy smashing their puppeteers in Iran, we would be much further down the road to victory over Islamofacism than we are right now.
And no doubt that the Sunnis would be cheering us on…albeit quietly.
October 26th, 2007 at 10:00 pmIran would not be the only place we would strike … We would be putting into check, preemptively, all their little global Iranian insurgency plans as well…Stupid f*ckers talk so much they give themselves away. A special note: Russia will be dumbstruck and neutralized as far as any decisive capability for interaction. This will be due to under developed strategic planning because of a lack of initiatives post Iran destruction.
October 26th, 2007 at 10:18 pmit may be necessary to bomb some places in Iran, but their capability to carry on their “evil” terrorist agenda will not be over for so. just look at their lobbies in your countries and everywhere in the world where the persian diaspora is spread ; these people are and remain persians, they are not japaneses ! that is why your government hesitate, and our EU too
October 27th, 2007 at 3:38 amHouse 6:
Oh we got all the reason that we need to take out the Iranians/ About 30 years worth of reasons. What we don’t have is the kind of intel that we had prior to Bill Buckley’s capture and murder. Both Bill Buckley and Bill Casey had an outstanding intel network that they had setup as a counterweight to the Hizzies and the Iraniacs in the ME.
All that went away during the brutal torture and murder of Bill Buckley…who gave away all of our assets to the Syrians, and the Iraniacs under torture by professional sadists in Iran, Lebanon and Syrian gestapo HQ.
So while we have no “boots on the ground” in the intel community, it doesn’t really matter. The name of the game is to take out the Iranian NBC and offensive military capabilities…the only intel we need for that goal comes from targeting data derived from satelights.
Will GW pull the trigger before 2008? Who knows. He seems to be leaning that way.
And if he does, it sounds to me that he may get support from other governments in the process. He should stick to his mantra however, we will go after all state sponsors of terrorists, and that governments around the world are either with us (friends) or against us (enemies).
World reaction be damned. Iran wants a fight…by all means we should strive to accomidate them and smash their nuke program to bits.
October 27th, 2007 at 6:58 amThe very thought that I could wake up tomorrow, pour a cup of coffee and see the headline: “IRAN BOMBED INTO WEEPING SUBMISSION” is giving me a stiffie!
The prospect of wiping the smug smile off Armadinnerjacket’s monkey-like face…God…Oh, God!…YES…YES, YES! YES!
October 27th, 2007 at 9:34 amWhat concerns me about engagements with Iran without a follow up of ground units to secure land is that AQ will just move from Iraq into Iran. Preventing them from building strongholds in Iraq is kind of moot if they just build them in a crippled Iran instead.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:17 pmDan~ I appreciate your comments. I am fully aware of Putin’s general demeanor, however, I still do not understand it. He is quite an enigma IMO. I agree with attacking Iran, however, I have reservations in regards to how the rest of the world will react. I just hope it will offer the benefits you have mentioned.
October 28th, 2007 at 3:13 pm