Saturday, December 26, 2009

NY Times Says Obama, Not Israel, Should Bomb Iran...Wait, The NY Times Said That?...

From Weasel Zippers:


Yes, they really did....

(NY Times)- PRESIDENT OBAMA should not lament but sigh in relief that Iran has rejected his nuclear deal, which was ill conceived from the start. Under the deal, which was formally offered through the United Nations, Iran was to surrender some 2,600 pounds of lightly enriched uranium (some three-quarters of its known stockpile) to Russia, and the next year get back a supply of uranium fuel sufficient to run its Tehran research reactor for three decades. The proposal did not require Iran to halt its enrichment program, despite several United Nations Security Council resolutions demanding such a moratorium.

Iran was thus to be rewarded with much-coveted reactor fuel despite violating international law. Within a year, or sooner in light of its expanding enrichment program, Iran would almost certainly have replenished and augmented its stockpile of enriched uranium, nullifying any ostensible nonproliferation benefit of the deal. .....The final question is, who should launch the air strikes? Israel has shown an eagerness to do so if Iran does not stop enriching uranium, and some hawks in Washington favor letting Israel do the dirty work to avoid fueling anti-Americanism in the Islamic world.

But there are three compelling reasons that the United States itself should carry out the bombings. First, the Pentagon’s weapons are better than Israel’s at destroying buried facilities. Second, unlike Israel’s relatively small air force, the United States military can discourage Iranian retaliation by threatening to expand the bombing campaign. (Yes, Israel could implicitly threaten nuclear counter-retaliation, but Iran might not perceive that as credible.) Finally, because the American military has global reach, air strikes against Iran would be a strong warning to other would-be proliferators


revereridesagain said...

Holy cow. Somebody at the TIMES actually knows a ticking bomb when they see one. Isn't it amazing how they get down to business once the consequences of continuing to strum along singing Kumbaya become clear.

Ed Miller said...

No, unfortunately, "they" really didn't say that: An op-ed contributor appearing in the New York Times did.

Would have been nice, but they've (allegedly*) buried Holocaust stories before, and they'll probably do it again.

* see for details on these shocking allegations against the New York Times

- pupista! (barking mad on the right)