Another thought provoking column
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Has Mitt Romney given Israel a blank check for war?
So it seemed from the declaration in Jerusalem by his
adviser Dan Senor, who all but flashed Israel a green light for war, signaling
the Israelis that, if you go, Mitt’s got your back:
“If Israel has to take action on its own in order to stop
Iran from developing that capability, the governor would respect that
decision.”
“No option would be excluded. Gov. Romney recognizes
Israel’s right to defend itself and that it is right for America to stand with
it.”
What does “stand with” Israel, if she launches a surprise
attack on Iran, mean? Does it mean the United States will guide Israeli planes
to their targets and provide bases on their return? Does it mean U.S. air cover
while Israeli planes strike Iran?
This would make America complicit in a pre-emptive strike
and a co-belligerent in the war to follow.
What Dan Senor said comes close to being a U.S. war
guarantee for Israel, while leaving the decision as to when the war begins to
them.
This country has never done that before.
And what does Senor mean by Israel’s need to act “to stop
Iran from developing (the) capability” to acquire nuclear weapons?
“What does “stand with” Israel, if she launches a
surprise attack on Iran, mean?”
The collective decision of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies
in 2007—that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon — reportedly reaffirmed in
2011 — has never been rescinded. Nor has the White House produced any hard
evidence Iran is building a bomb.
* * * REPEAT * * *
The collective decision of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies
in 2007—that Iran is not pursuing a nuclear weapon — reportedly reaffirmed in
2011 — has never been rescinded. Nor has the White House produced any hard
evidence Iran is building a bomb.
(*SHRUG*)
Moreover, Iran’s known nuclear facilities are under
inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Does the government know something the American people
are not being told?
Undeniably, Iran, by enriching uranium to 3.5%, then up
to 20%, has a greater “capability” than five years ago of building a nuclear
weapon. But Japan, South Korea and Brazil also have that capability — and none
has decided to build a nuclear weapon.
Gov. Romney did not go as far as Dan Senor, but he, too,
seems to be saying that not only is Iran’s possession of a nuclear weapon a
casus belli for the United States, even an Iran that is capable of building
such a weapon is intolerable.
“The regime in Iran is five years closer to developing
nuclear weapons capability,” said Romney. “Preventing that outcome must be our
highest national security priority.”
Preventing what outcome is “our highest national security
priority”?
Stopping Iran from building a bomb? Or stopping Iran from
being able to build a bomb years from now?
The governor seems to be aligning himself with Israel’s
hawks who are demanding that not only must Iran swear off nuclear weapons
forever, Iran must cease all enrichment of uranium, and dismantle the
facilities at Natanz and Fordow.
Romney’s policy is zero enrichment, said Dan Senor.
Tehran must understand that “the alternative to zero enrichment is severe, and
that’s why the threat of military force has to be critical.”
This is tantamount to an ultimatum to Tehran: Either give
up all enrichment of uranium and any right to enrich, or face war.
Here we come to the heart of the issue, which may be
impossible to resolve short of war.
Unlike its neighbors Israel and Pakistan, Iran has signed
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has no nuclear weapons. The ayatollah
has said they are immoral and Iran will not acquire them. But under the NPT,
Iran claims the right to enrich uranium and seek the benefits of nuclear
technology. And in that decision, the people of Iran stand behind their
government.
Is denying Iran the right to enrich uranium a reason for
America to plunge into its fifth war in that region in a generation?
That appears where we are headed.
Reportedly, Obama’s national security adviser recently
briefed Bibi Netanyahu on the specifics of U.S. contingency plans to attack
Iran.
Has Congress been briefed?
Have the American people been consulted... or are we
simply irrelevant?
A decade ago, this country sent an army up to Baghdad to
overthrow Saddam and strip Iraq of a vast arsenal of chemical and biological
weapons we were told it had and was preparing to use.
We were misled; we were deceived; we were lied to.
Before we outsource to Bibi and Ehud Barak the decision
to take us to war with a country three times the size of Iraq, we need to know:
Was the U.S. intelligence community wrong in 2007 and
2011? Is Iran hell-bent on building nuclear weapons? If so, where are they
constructing and testing these weapons?
Finally, if Iran is willing to permit intrusive
inspections of its actual and suspected nuclear sites, but insists on its right
to enrich uranium, should we go to war to deny them that right?
[I]f we are going to go to war again, this time
with Iran, the decision should be made in America, according to our
Constitution, not by any other country.
