There is one problem with doing this. Neighbor states would have to be warned to shut down their facilities on short order.

Lots of other problems come to mind, but ending a genocidal government might be worth it.

Again, thank you.

hillbillyjim on January 12, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Seconded!

Sacrifice the pawns….to spare the queen. Got it.

mindhacker on January 12, 2009 at 2:17 PM

Applicable…

coldwarrior on January 12, 2009

I meant to get back to you sooner; I had to do some unvirtual reality errands…

Thank you for your responses and your other posts as well. I find that I learn something new or become aware of different perspectives that I would have otherwise missed when I read your comments.

From the level of your knowledge on many of our foreign policy threads, I have begun to suspect that you are no amateur to the field.

I would be interested in your opinion on how geopolitical realities will affect the upcoming administration and its stated goals and policies in the short and long term. (I’m sure you’ve already covered some of this in various threads over time).

Again, thank you.

/sarc

Yep, that did read a bit off target.

Certainly, no Israeli acceptance of ANY cease fire or any other permutation of that concept until Israel is completely satisfied that any Hamas ability to launch attacks, or even organize above the individual level is gone, for good, with the clear understanding that ANY Hamas operation, be it a single suicide bomber or a couple Hamas followers firing off a single rocket towards Israel will be met with blood letting that Hamas’s great grandchildren will look back on and ask why great grandpa could be sooo stupid…

But, let Hamas continue to try to promulgate a war…for it gives Israel clarity that Hamas is not going to surrender until Hamas is dead, and license to carry on with all deliberate effort toward that end.

No hudna. Not now, never. Any rational observer can easily see what past hudna’s and cease fires have allowed Hamas and other Islamists to do…regroup, rearm, and re-direct operations with impunity.

And Grant was right…in our times, the Japanese became awfully compliant in a hurry when faced with a possible total destruction. It works.

Frankly, I would hope that Hamas does not waiver…

coldwarrior on January 12, 2009 at 8:12 AM

I would hope that they do. If they budge even an inch toward the Isrealis, the stupidity of what they did will become apparent to even the most clueless Palestinian on the street. Put Gaza through war, cause civilian casualties (looks like the score is 1 civilian for each Hamas combatant), and get NOTHING back?

What you should really be hoping is that the Israelis do not waver. If they toss Hamas the smallest bone, Hamas will call that a victory and the hudna will begin again.

I’ve gone over Ulysses S. Grant’s autobiography recently, and the logic of “unconditional surrender” is delightful. You take away the enemy’s honor, and then you give it back, and finally, while they have their honor, it isn’t really theirs anymore — it’s yours.

I have no doubt that the day after Iran hits Isreal with a nuke, the UN will condemn Isreal for causing so much air pollution.

MarkTheGreat on January 12, 2009 at 9:00 AM

+1

For that matter, if it were possible for Israel to take the Iranians into custody, would that be an act of war?

njcommuter on January 12, 2009 at 8:14 AM

Since Iran captured British troops, it would be a nice turnabout for the Israelis to capture the Iranians.

Seriously.

Poor poor Hamas…once again a victim.

coldwarrior on January 12, 2009 at 10:32 AM

Any chance of this being the last time?

Now…which of these is the bad guy in all of this?

Poor poor Hamas…once again a victim.

We have the ways and means, let’s use them.

NoDonkey on January 12, 2009 at 8:26 AM

Only for another eight days.

Tommy_G on January 12, 2009 at 8:34 AM

Tommy, I was just thinking the same thing.

Those repressive media controls can often work against the current regime in Teheran.

This past October, the US and Iran agreed to allow Iranian bloggers come to the US to cover the US Presidential election. Then the carpet was pulled out from under them, after these bloggers obtained visas, booked air fare and such.

Incrementally, sometimes just a few Iranians at a time, over the past several years, word gets out and word gets in…a large segment of Iran understands full well why they are continuing to move back to the Dark Ages and why they are being kept out of the 21st century.

As someone else said..public opinion be damned. They need to finish this.

If, heaven forbid, Mubarak is removed…Omar Suleiman is in the best position to take over. Suleiman fully in charge in Cairo would be a bad thing for Hamas, and for Iran in the long run.

Perhaps removal of the current Iranian regime along with Hamas would indeed be a good thing.

coldwarrior on January 12, 2009 at 8:53 AM

We should put Reza Pahlavi II, Crown Prince of Iran on the Peacock thrown. He would whip them Mullahs into shape pronto.

coldwarrior on January 12, 2009 at 8:53 AM

With the repressive security and the control of the media organs present in Iran, it seems that short of war, the only way the mullahs’ stranglehold on Iran will change is violent revolution.

If the fortunes of the Iraqi people improve drastically, this could be an incentive that might allow that “spark” to catch tinder.

Israelis are notoriously tight lipped and wily. We’ll see what they got going down.

Eventually one side will lose their will to fight.

Only then can natural order is restored.

Respeck!