By Alan Caruba
The only thing we know for sure about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, is that he lies about everything. In that regard, he may not be that much different from other world leaders for whom lying is almost a requirement for the job.
Only international law keeps the United States from seizing Mahmoud as an exchange for the return of two of the American hostages we know are being held by his regime. In a nice suburban CIA safe house, we might even convince him to cough up some state secrets about where the secret nuclear weapons facilities are, but we are far too civilized to do anything like that.
In discussing Mahmoud, we have to separate him from the Iranian people who live in a prison nation. A recent Wall Street Journal article by Karim Sadjapour noted that “nearly three million people, according to the mayor of Tehran, took to the streets to protest the election results.”
At the time, President Obama demurred from commenting on this astonishing outpouring of the Iranian people's anger, preferring not to “interfere.” This is in line with his general policy of getting out of the Middle East under any and all circumstances. Having already betrayed the American people, using thuggish methods to impose unwanted “reforms”, he saw no reason to not betray Iranians as well.
What was Obama’s reward? Reports of Mahmoud’s arrival in New York to attend an annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly were replete with his threats if a possible U.S.-supported Israeli air strike should occur. Given Obama’s antipathy toward Israel, that seems unlikely.
Still, that did not deter Mahmoud from threatening a war with the U.S. that “would know no boundaries”, adding “War is not just bombs.” Since he said this in New York City where the ninth anniversary of 9/11 just occurred, neither New Yorkers nor the rest of America needs any reminder that we and the West are engaged in a war with Islam that is without boundaries.
Reportedly Mahmoud even had the audacity to claim that Iran has no plans to make a nuclear weapon. Perhaps this explains why they recently told International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors familiar with such matters to leave Iran on the next plane. Even the normally tolerant IAEA expressed its annoyance with such behavior.
Three former Iranian diplomats recently defected in Europe, denouncing the regime’s legitimacy, and very likely in danger for their lives because the Islamic Republic is well known for assassinating dissidents living overseas. One must assume that, since Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, has demanded that all Muslims obey him as the earthly deputy of Muhammad and the Twelfth Iman, he believes he can murder whomever he wants.
I have a theory that Israel will not attack Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities until Obama is out of office. He has proven to be the most anti-Israel President to have ever held the office. The Israelis know that the latest round of White House-sponsored peace talks are the same bad joke they have always been. The Palestinian Liberation Authority has far less to fear from Israel than from Hamas, an Iranian puppet.
Moreover, since the Iranian regime expects an attack any day now, the Israelis will patiently wait until some time has gone by. They have destroyed such facilities in Iraq and Syria and there is no reason to believe they will not rid the region of Iran’s; very likely with the grateful assistance of other Middle Eastern nations that cordially despise the current Iranian regime.
Mahmoud’s bluster and threats sound a lot to me like a line from a Shakespearean play, “Methinks he doth protest too much.”
© Alan Caruba, 2010
1 comment:
Ajad's and the Islamic Republic of Iran have an extremely weak position in Iran and very likely can command less than one-third of the population.
However, like the Argentine generals in the early 1980s, they step on the Lion's Tail (In this case the USA and Israel) in order to unite the Iranian people behind their criminal regime.
The only problem with this tactic is that sooner or later the Lion becomes enraged and strikes back at the boy with the stick.
A lesson well taught by the British to the Argentine cabal in 1982.
Post a Comment