Ted Koppel: Let ‘em have the bomb
posted at 12:19 pm on October 3, 2006 by Allahpundit
They think Iraq is Vietnam. I guess it follows that they’d think Iran is the Soviet Union.
If Iran is bound and determined to have nuclear weapons, let it.
The elimination of American opposition on this issue would open the way to genuine normalization between our two nations. It might even convince the Iranians that their country can flourish without nuclear weapons.
But this should also be made clear to Tehran: If a dirty bomb explodes in Milwaukee, or some other nuclear device detonates in Baltimore or Wichita, if Israel or Egypt or Saudi Arabia should fall victim to a nuclear “accident,” Iran should understand that the U.S. government will not search around for the perpetrator. The return address will be predetermined, and it will be somewhere in Iran.
Deterrence, in other words.
If a dirty bomb went off in Milwaukee and Bush answered with a nuke on Tehran, the left would start shrieking instantly about genocide, disproportionality, and the lack of evidence of culpability. Same playbook as their carping about “collective punishment” of Palestinians by Israel, only writ much, much larger. And they’d have a point: a dirty bomb could just as well come from AQ using material obtained from North Korean or Russian agents, with no assistance from Iran. It wouldn’t bother me if we held them responsible anyway. But I bet it’d bother Ted Koppel.
Nightline might even run a special two-hour episode where they read the names of some of the Iranian dead.
One of Iran’s deputy nuclear chiefs made a surprise announcement yesterday offering to let France handle their uranium enrichment — which would, in theory, solve the problem. Assuming, that is, that you trust the French not to weaponize it for them on the sly, and that this isn’t merely another bid to stall for time, with the offer to be withdrawn later at an appropriate moment.
And assuming, of course, that Iran wouldn’t continue to do some covert enrichment of its own back home.
France has already rejected the offer. They want everything done multilaterally. Which, for once, is probably a shrewd move.
Update: Sanctions are coming next week. Maybe.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
As soon as Iran bullies them a little, they will cave and accept the offer (and any other
demandoffer made by Iran).Rick on October 3, 2006 at 12:32 PM
Instead of the bomb, why don’t we let them have Ted Koppel?
On the French enrichment scenario, isn’t that ever so slightly preferable to the previous offer in which Russia would do it?
Ah, I don’t like either one of them.
Pablo on October 3, 2006 at 12:49 PM
Their goal is to have nukes. It does not matter what they say or do, they are going to try and build nukes. PERIOD.
Listen to the ‘experts’, listen to their President, Iran wants to be a world power with nukes. They will lie and steal until they have them….or they are stopped.
IF they attain nukes, they will use them on Israel first, then…..?
shooter on October 3, 2006 at 12:51 PM
I guess Koppel doesnt have any relatives in Israel or just doesnt care about anyone there. Let Iran have the bomb and there wont BE an Israel. Iran’s mad mullahs WANT this confrontation. They want to be the supreme power in that part of the world and are convinced this is the way to get it.
Why would they take him? He is much more effective for them here.
labwrs on October 3, 2006 at 12:56 PM
Then Washingon DC. Obviously. Will anyone have the sense to get the pages out in time?
NellE on October 3, 2006 at 12:59 PM
Those who were not around during those years are lucky since there is nothing to compare against.
Just reason to our next generation, if these people are willing to fly planes into buildings, what do you think they would do with a bomb.
If they are willing, they will.
Kini on October 3, 2006 at 1:29 PM
Someone get Koppel and Frist running the Pentagon and we’ll all live happily ever after.
RightWinged on October 3, 2006 at 1:37 PM
Is “Koppel” French?
Corky on October 3, 2006 at 1:54 PM
How very typical.
How very leftwing.
How very anti-America.
georgej on October 3, 2006 at 2:05 PM
I am surprised that France, and specifically President Chirac, would forego an opportunity to pocket kickback cash by looking the other way while Iran continues to enrich weapons-grade uranium or plutonium.
chsw
chsw on October 3, 2006 at 2:09 PM
A solution. Pebble bed reactors.
Theworldisnotenough on October 3, 2006 at 2:24 PM
Here’s what I don’t get. Is Ted Koppel really so stupid that he thinks the nukes themselves are the only problem here? If Iran has nukes how do you stop them from using terrorists as instruments of foreign policy? And I’m not even talking about nuclear terrorism. I’m talking about plain old airplanes into buildings and political assassinations terrorism. You think Hiz’b'allah, IJ, Hamas, et.al. are bad now? Wait until their sponsor is armed with a nuclear invasion deterrent. Then see how active Iran becomes in, oh let’s say, the drafting of the new EU constitution, the runnung of the Afghan govt., the running of the Iraqi govt., the running of every Arab govt., the pursuit of any American interest within 1500 miles of the Iranian border. Iranian nukes + Iranian oil money + Iranian sponsored terror orgs. = the new Evil Empire.
Ted Koppel is a douchebag moron and I can’t believe anyone takes him seriously.
The Apologist on October 3, 2006 at 2:32 PM
Perhaps the title of this piece should be, “Ted Koppel is A STUPID IDIOT!”
Let’s look at some of this liberal nutcases reasoning, shall we? He posits…
First of all, we are treated to the liberals gay assed impotence, which automatically “takes off the table” anything that would actually work. He says what can we do? “Little or Nothing”. BZZZZZ. WRONG ANSWER.
We could count to six and bomb their asses back to the third century where they belong, Ted. We could put a parking lot with a nice McDonalds where the Iranian President “ImMadInTheHead”, formerly lived, vaporizing him and his virgins! Again the liberal penchant for impotence is showing. But Teddy the Soft, isn’t through..
Like a typical liberal idiot, he thinks that fake Logic and high stakes situations placed in a friggin’ SCREENPLAY, where the outcomes are decided by the AUTHOR and NO ONE HAS FREE WILL, are applicable to real life! And the hero of his tale couldn’t be an American President who brought Japan to it’s knees under slightly similiar REAL circumstances, could it? Nooooooo. Old Teddy lives in a fake world with fake hero’s doing fake things. The liberal loon continues, with his “Godfather-esgue” motivational speech…
The inferiority of the liberal mind is all too apparent in this one folks. Let us examine the MOVIE MAGIC reasoning that the stupid liberal FAILS to follow to it’s logical conclusion.
FIRST. In the Movie The Godfather, Brando’s character is representative of someone WHO DIDN’T UNDERSTAND THE THREAT HE WAS FACING. Sound familiar? His efforts to appease those who killed his son were RIDICULED by Michael, who would soon assume the leadership position. The “Godfathers” attempt at reconciliation with those who killed “Sonny”, was emblematic in the screenplay of a “Lion in Winter”, an aging “Don” with “Old world honor and values”, confronting a “new threat”, i.e, criminals who now had no honor! Remember, he was concerned with the “lowlifes” who engaged in stuff that no “self respecting” Mafia guy would take part in, like running heroin and coke. Why was he opposed to this? Because people under the influence of drugs had NO HONOR and were prone to do things like, SHOOT COPS, and kill WOMEN AND CHILDREN, again, sound familiar?!
His character was developed in this way by the great Mario Puzo, to SHOW EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF THE LESSON EXTRACTED BY STUPID KOPPEL! It was designed to show that the old Don was a DINOSAUR, wholly unequipped to deal with the NEW THREAT HE WAS FACING,namely, gangsters with no honor ! This was deemed by the logic of the screenplay to be an INFERIOR position chock full of FAULTY REASONING, which became all to obvious when Michael waited until his father was out of the way, AND THEN KILLED EVERYBODY WHO HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE DEATH OF HIS BROTHER AND THE ATTEMPT ON HIS FATHERS LIFE!
Ted Koppel had just given us an objective example of why liberals are so faggoty in their thinking and unmanly in their actions. Does anyone believe that the Don would have made such a deal with people who DESIRED THEIR OWN DEATHS IN TRIBUTE TO ALLAH? Or was the threat of death, the thing he was holding over their heads? Clearly, an ideology which seeks it’s own death pursuant to some reward IN THE FIRST PLACE, would not be moved by such a threat. Rather than be cowed into submission they would be emboldened, thinking that all of the muslims we nuked, were in paradise happily raping virgins.
He reasons that a script, based on a “code of honor”, has relevance when dealing with dishonorable, suicidal, genocidal, maniacs. Check please.
Soothsayer on October 3, 2006 at 3:07 PM
Right on the money, AP. Why do people listen to this silly leftist pos? He has zero credibility.
Jaibones on October 3, 2006 at 3:12 PM
or some nuclear device detonates in Baltimore
Hey, great idea, let’s give ‘em the benefit of the doubt. “We trust you not to use nukes on us, but if you do, well then you just better watch out, mister!” Whattaya say we don’t give ‘em the chance to prove us right, hmm?
Sooth, nice work on the Godfather analogy. Libs always compare the real world to pop culture, it’s how they deal with it, it’s all they understand, which is why I use this scene from “The Terminator” to explain the war on terror to them: Kyle to Sarah “LISTEN! And understand! Those terrorists are out there. They can’t be bargained with, they can’t be reasoned with. They don’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear, and they absolutely WILL NOT STOP … EVER! until you are dead!”
Tony737 on October 3, 2006 at 4:52 PM
I’ve got one for ya. How many of our problems would just evaporate, if America were energy independent?
Ole George could get out his exec. order pen (I know he has one)and order drilling in the ANWR and every offshore site possible and he could order emergency construction of refineries.
It doesn’t take a think tank to figure this out.
At the same time push full speed ahead towards the new tech. for energy sources and then put oil in reserve and dismantle the oil rigs that are unsightly when they come on line.
Get us independent first and then go for the future solution.
Sometimes, some people, call this leadership.
Speakup on October 3, 2006 at 5:11 PM
Old news men never die, they just talk and and talk and talk and talk……….
d1carter on October 3, 2006 at 5:11 PM
I actually agree with this position once in a while. Mostly when playing out scenarios on how “We” are going to address Islam imperialism, aka Jihad. There are the questions of energy, Israel, terrorism and the use of democracy in the midddle east that are a little bit more than appeasement or kick their ass options can address. But I digress from the reasoning of why to “let” them have the bomb.
You want to play in the nuclear bigs “xyz”? Come on in brothers and sisters, BTW did we tell you that the acceptable behavior rules change when you join this club. Try something out of school and you end up NOT living in an ashtray for the next few millenia. You now have the power to strike a strong but NOT fatal blow against the great Satan, render Jerusalem, Mecca and Medina uninhabitable, put an end to your country, your religion and potentially the planet. The risk, obvious first strike damage for the west, great loss of life and potentially the planet. Acceptable risk? For me, unfortunately at times, yes.
I think we will all come to our senses, keep saying no to nukes in “xyz” until we have to put up or shut up then roll-over and play stupid until Islam runs up against the Chinese. The Chinese will put the hurt on Islam as never before, ending it. Where we’ll be then I’m not sure.
che che
GoingThere
GoingThere on October 3, 2006 at 7:12 PM
Speakup gets the puck at center ice, he fights his way through the defense … he shoots! … HE SCOOOOOORESSSSS!!! The goalie didn’t even see that one comin’.
Tony737 on October 3, 2006 at 8:08 PM
I’m with “GoingThere”, I believe the Chinese are the overlooked, unpredictable, dark horse in this crazy race. They’ve been waiting, oh…five or six hundred years to sit back at the grown-up table again.
Their economy is roaring and they are thirsty for oil. Unlike the US, theyre not exactly *tolerant* of dissent or anti-social behavior. They have the largest population in the world…think how attractive all those souls are to Allah.
The upside to us is that less than 10% of China is suitable for farming, they are burdened with being an import nation if they waqnt to keep 1.5 billion bellies full. Hungry peasants are angry peasants.
We truly live in strange days. Get in, sit down, buckle up, the next 10 – 20 years are going to be a wild ride.
Alden Pyle on October 3, 2006 at 8:59 PM
LOL
Speakup on October 4, 2006 at 1:38 PM