Muslim Glory Predicates Apocalypse

 

Thug-In-Chief Ahmadinejad confirms it again:

If he ever became the supreme decision maker in his country, [Ahmadinejad] would "sacrifice half of Iran for the sake of eliminating Israel," Giora Eiland, Israel's former national security adviser, told The Jerusalem Post on Thursday. [...]

The 49-year-old Iranian president, he said, "has a religious conviction that Israel's demise is essential to the restoration of Muslim glory, that the Zionist thorn in the heart of the Islamic nations must be removed. And he will pay almost any price to right the perceived historic wrong. If he becomes the supreme leader and has a nuclear capability, that's a real threat."

Maybe Venezuela President Hugo Chavez is secretly assuring China, that he can cover any Oil supply shortfalls once Iran fulfills its promise and consequently lies in ruins following the inevitable and equally devastating retaliatory nuclear strikes. Could be one reason why Chavez is so openly supportive of our Thug-In-Chief's genocidal cause. Nah, he's just backing whoever 'opposes' his capitalist arch-enemy, the United States of America. Pathetic really, especially as in the eyes of our Thug-In-Chief, he too is nothing but an Christian infidel, who either must convert to Islam or otherwise except Dhimmitude, namely second-class status under Sharia law.

Don't you just love it; first lure Israel into a false sense of security by calling for the need of a 'robust' force of up to 15,000 in order to get 1701 passed and implemented, only to do a complete u-turn: Even though we learn today that close to 7,000 European troops will be deployed, French President Jacques Chirac tells us that a level of 15,000 troops was "excessive'' and it made "no sense'' to have such a large contingent alongside the Lebanese army in the region. Go figure...

But why worry about enemies when you have friends like the French: 

The United States worked assiduously with France to draft a Security Council resolution that would create a powerful international force, and thus a real buffer, in south Lebanon. However, when the Lebanese government and the Arab League objected, France became their lawyer and renegotiated the draft with the United States. The State Department acquiesced to a far weaker resolution on the quite reasonable grounds that since France was going to lead and be the major participant in the international force, we should not be dictating the terms under which the force would operate.

But we underestimated French perfidy. (Overestimating it is mathematically impossible.) Once the resolution was passed, France announced that instead of the expected 5,000 troops, it would be sending 200. The French defense minister explained that France was not going to send out soldiers under a limited mandate and weak rules of engagement -- precisely the mandate and rules of engagement that the French had just gotten us to agree to.

This breathtaking duplicity -- payback for the Louisiana Purchase? -- left the State Department red-faced. (It was offset somewhat when, last night, France agreed to send an additional 1,600 troops.) But the setback was minor compared with what we now face with Iran. Hezbollah in southern Lebanon is a major irritant, but a nuclear Iran is a major strategic threat.

A 'strategic threat' to some is clearly an existential one to Israel. The latest purchase of two German Subs doesn't alter much, as they won't be delivered until 2010 - Ahmadinejad won't wait that long - and provide predominantly  second-strike nuclear capabilities, which, as we know, doesn't bother our Thug-In-Chief much. But it's a nice touch for Germany to finance one third of the $1.3 billion total cost, continuing her military support for Israel; a decade ago the Germans donated two $350 million subs.

The stance of the German government underlines a radical transformation for that country's people. While their grandparents' generation perpetrated the Holocaust, and the previous generation paid for the Holocaust with reparations to its victims, the current generation is helping prevent a second Holocaust by providing the IDF with some of the most important defensive weapons systems in its arsenal. As far as corrective steps go, that's a huge one.

The Iranian threat to Israel today, of course, is many times more horrible than the one posed by Saddam Hussein over 15 years ago. While Israel ultimately must take responsibility for its own defense, it is crucial that it have friends in the international community who are prepared to help. In this case, Germany has proved that it is a significant such friend.

And if you believe Amir Taheri, Nasrallah's Hezbollah and his masters in Iran and Syria, are far less popular than our MSM would have us believe. But that won't help Prime Minister Fouad Seniora, as he may very well have signed his death warrant, saying that he hoped a peace deal could be reached between Lebanon and Israel and that Hezbollah is not "in the same position where it was before the war, and won't be able to repeat what it did. It learned the lesson from what happened." Michael Totten thinks even 'talk' is a big deal... We'll see.

Meanwhile, Wretchard @ the Belmont Club quickly squashes any sense of optimism with his take on Foreign Affairs in "The Next War of the World".

The twentieth century was the bloodiest era in history. Despite the comfortable assumption that the twenty-first will be more peaceful, the same ingredients that made the last hundred years so destructive are present today. In particular, a conflict in the Middle East may well spark another global conflagration. The United States could prevent such an outcome -- but it may not be willing to.

Nice...

Comments

[Terry Crane]

Russia is set to loose dramatically from nuclear Iran, as it influence can break the country in several pieces including Muslim Ural, and separate Sibirian oil form the Moscow part. However, V[ladimir Putin] cannot care less - he is on a sprint to boost his retirement fund.

Russian weapons sales to Iran are practically free - they are really to boost oil price.

[chrys]

Comments usually don't stay here?! BUT - had to let you know that I truly enjoy the art with this post! Great target.

[rich]

Hugo Chavez is not the only oil producer that would profit from a Middle East in ruins.

Where does Iran buy its arms?

Where does Iran get political cover at the U.N.?

Who would make out like a bandit if oil hits $300 a barrel?

Russia, that's who.

Ahamdinejad may be nuts, but V is not.

[Alexandra]

John,

Thank you for the thought, but alas I wish I could churn out writing a post with all the links and read all the articles I have linked to, as well as photoshop and produce the above image in 40 minutes.

I actually posted extremely late today due to other commitments, in fact sometime after 6pm EST, despite the TypePad time stamp which I don't always remember to adjust according to where I am. Unfortunately I did not have time to see any comments until now.

[weekenderman]

I don't think the problem is the leaders, Wahrheit. I think the problem is the followers.

[Wahrheit]

The photo is very on point--is it really better to wait for a vast and terrible war or target a man, or small group of men, who talk constantly about their love and need for killing you?

This little putz is no Hitler, but he's almost as dangerous. Unfortunately, like the men of the WWI generation who could imagine nothing worse than the slaughter of trench warfare, Western leadership can imagine nothing worse than--what? Another 9/11? Another Iraq War? The contempt of European intellectuals? Losing the next election? I hope they're just waiting for the right strategic moment...if they feel they have to wait until we're attacked, I want new leaders.

[John Werntz]

Curious coincidence--

Today, 8-25-06 at 12:47 PM I rudely intruded upon the Family Roundtable of comments to Alexandra's post "In danger of complicity" to call readers' attention to a column by Amir Taheri in today's WSJ Opinion Journal entitled "Hezbollah Didn't Win."  At the time I characterized my intrusion as "off topic but relevant." 

Oddly enough, some 40 minutes later in today's post "Muslim glory predicates apocalypse" Alexandra links--among a wealth of others--to the same Taheri column.  Sheer happenstance, or forgiveness for my rudeness?  I do hope it's the latter.