Thursday, February 23, 2012

Bolton: Iran Goes Nuclear on Obama's Watch

Iran’s relentless nuclear quest -John Bolton

The pace of Iran's nuclear program demonstrates its lack of concern for U.S. military action. Indeed, so confident is Tehran that it not only has conspired to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington on our own soil, but has been busily targeting Israeli diplomats in terrorist attacks and giving Europe a taste of its own medicine by cutting off oil supplies even before new European Union sanctions take effect.

Sadly for America, Iran's progress represents a bipartisan foreign-policy failure, extending over three successive administrations. The Obama administration's only real distinction, embarrassing though it is, is to have carried Clinton and George W. Bush administration mistakes to their ultimate conclusion. Mr. Obama could well be remembered in history as the president asleep in the wheelhouse when Iran actually achieved both nuclear weapons and a fully indigenous nuclear fuel cycle.

Those in the White House who fear an Israeli attack more than Iranian nuclear weapons may prevail. But a world where Iran has nuclear weapons (and, inevitably therefore, so will others nearby) will be far more dangerous than a world after an Israeli military strike.
[Washington Times]


LHwrites said...

John Bolton is a boob. While it is true that he pointed out one fact---that the Iranian nuclear problem began long ago---to blame Obama for being the one to "allow" everything to culminate is a bit dumb for someone supposedly well versed in international relations. Iraq could blame England for the American invasion because after all if they did not start our colonies and then fight the revolutionary war so badly we would not have been in a position of world leadership. And if G-d did not liberate the Jews from Egypt then the Arabs would have to continue to hate each other because they could not focus on Israel--let's blame G-d too. These problems began long ago and our disaster in Iraq not only empowered Iran but limited our military options by using up resources, bringing on huge deficits, and creating a war weary populace not looking for another conflict. We used up our good will on the world stage when it was clear we manufactured the evidence of WMD, and it was also clear Iraq was different but not better off after the war. Two long and indecisive wars, a huge deficit, the worst economy since the depression, an empowered Iran with nuclear ambitions, a disaffected MidEast, a war weary populace, poor international relations---this is what Obama was handed. Nevertheless, he killed bin Laden, brought about the strongest sanctions against Iran, has repaired international relations, supported Israel at the UN even if not always with his rhetoric, and has not taken a military response to Iran off the table. He has done all this while confronting the fact that both China and Russia are against strong actions on Iran. Since 1980 when the American hostages were released no one has tried or effectively controlled Iran's aggressiveness---except Hussein's Iraq. Much like the American economy, things that were wrecked for years often cannot be fixed overnight.

Bruce said...

Okay. But you could be underestimating the fallout of President Obama allowing Iran to finish the race. And its consequences.

LHwrites said...

Possibly--or perhaps the world and Obama is not ready to allow Iran to go nuclear but must show every possible willingness to do it diplomatically first in order to be able to deal with this militarily without the conflict engaging China or Russia.