Countering Iran’s Designs, Do we have what it takes

From the National Review Online

As Americans wonder how to cope with Iran, Iran keeps killing Americans. The primary battleground is Iraq, where agents of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards fund and arm the Shiite extremists whose IEDs pierce the armor of U.S. soldiers and whose bombs massacre Iraqi civilians. Within the next few days, four senators will introduce legislation that faces these facts unflinchingly and calls on America to win.

The resolution — an amendment to a defense appropriations bill — is sponsored by Jon Kyl, Joseph Lieberman, Norm Coleman, and Lindsey Graham. It expresses the sense of the Senate that the U.S. should “combat, contain, and roll back” Iran’s “violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq.” It counsels doing so “through the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of [U.S. power], including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments.” It also urges the administration to designate the Revolutionary Guards a terrorist organization.

I agree completely with the proposed legislation to curtail Iran, including naming the Revolutionary Guards a terrorist organization and would also go so far as to name Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a Terrorist and reserve a cell for him at Gitmo.  Problem is, are we to believe that anyone in the US Government has the stones to actually back up this legislation? If recent circumstances surrounding the Iranian Terrorist in Chief’s visit to New York City offer any insight then one can assume that no one does.  No one in the State Department, No one in the White House… Not one member of congress has done one thing to prevent Ahmadinejad from spouting his hatred at the Third World Dictators convention from a building overlooking the East River.  Hell The State Department, The Administration and the Department of Homeland Security all let the NYPD take the heat for not allowing the Iranian Terrorist from going to ground zero… Don’t get me wrong here. I am glad the NYPD prevented it… But the decision should never have been theirs to begin with.  It should have been someone in the Administration who told the Iranian dictator not here, not now, not ever… For this legislation to ever mean anything, Politicians have to the political will to be able to back it up… Somehow I have serious doubts that anyone in Washington has that will.

Cartoon from Stop the ACLU


  1. Iranian Ajax

    this cartoon is priceless…..

    -Iranian Ajax

    I don’t think that it is a matter of willingness or courage that no one in the White House or in State told Ahmadinejad that he can’t come. This is a U.N. meeting. An organization that Iran is part of.

    If we said that Ahmadinejad cannot come to the U.N., that would effectively give them a case to withdraw from the U.N. and effectively render any resolution lobbed at them meaningless (not to say that they have any meaning presently either). My point is, you want to include Iran in international organizations as much as possible so that you can make use of the Government’s full range of options in dealing with crises.

    Don’t get my wrong, I am fully against the Iranian regime……but I do think that we need to be realistic. Excluding Iran from a meeting to which it pays dues to would be unrealistic.

    Iranian Ajax

  2. Ajax;

    Thank you for your comments. To keep the conversation in context I took your comment on the NY State License post and pasted to your comment here.

    In today’s political climate I can not see any politician willing to take a tough stand with Iran. They may have tough words in various pieces of legislation or speeches. But like any UNSC Resolution unless those tough words are backed with strong action, they are not worth the paper they are written on.

    Until the Government of Iran begins to feel some consequences for the support it gives to terrorists they will have no reason to change. Denying the Government of Iran any prestige from addressing a world body because of the support it gives to terrorists would in my opinion be a step in the right direction. Realistically it is never gonna happen. Since he will be in attendance hopefully the U.S. England or France will take the opportunity to publicly rebuke him and his government in that same forum… But again realistically it is never gonna happen.

  3. Unfortunately, Iran’s role in terror is not publicly accepted by many governments. As a result of this, any movement on Iran will face opposition. The only surprising thing is France being hawkish on Iran. Or course, the Administration being hopelessly bogged down in Iraq makes any position it takes on Iran suspect and inflammatory.

  4. Rambodoc it is true that Iran’s role in supporting terrorism is not universally accepted by everyone… but in the 1930’s Nazi Germany’s Deathcamp’s and other Human rights abuses were not universally accepted either.

    I agree with you that France’s stance is surprisingly hawkish and if any nation is gonna publicly rebuke the Iranian government at the UN, it will likely be France…

    Thanks for your comment;


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: