On-line Opinion Magazine…OK, it's a blog
Random header image... Refresh for more!

This Is Totally Unfair (!) [part the third]

This is piling on, someone should blow a whistle or throw a flag! This time it’s General John Abizaid, USA retired, a fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, and the longest serving Commander of Central Command. This is the fluent Arabic speaker, who was replaced by Admiral Fallon, after taking over from General Tommy Franks. He’s at the Hoover Institution; he’s supposed to be a conservative! He has more “fruit salad” on his uniform than a church picnic!

It’s those commies at Associated Press again: Abizaid: World Could Abide Nuclear Iran

WASHINGTON (AP) — Every effort should be made to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but failing that, the world could live with a nuclear-armed regime in Tehran, a recently retired commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Monday.

John Abizaid, the retired Army general who headed Central Command for nearly four years, said he was confident that if Iran gained nuclear arms, the United States could deter it from using them.

“Iran is not a suicide nation,” he said. “I mean, they may have some people in charge that don’t appear to be rational, but I doubt that the Iranians intend to attack us with a nuclear weapon.”

The Iranians are aware, he said, that the United States has a far superior military capability.

“I believe that we have the power to deter Iran, should it become nuclear,” he said, referring to the theory that Iran would not risk a catastrophic retaliatory strike by using a nuclear weapon against the United States.

“There are ways to live with a nuclear Iran,” Abizaid said in remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank. “Let’s face it, we lived with a nuclear Soviet Union, we’ve lived with a nuclear China, and we’re living with (other) nuclear powers as well.”

He stressed that he was expressing his personal opinion and that none of his remarks were based on his previous experience with U.S. contingency plans for potential military action against Iran.

Abizaid suggested military action to pre-empt Iran’s nuclear ambitions might not be the wisest course.

“War, in the state-to-state sense, in that part of the region would be devastating for everybody, and we should avoid it — in my mind — to every extent that we can,” he said. “On the other hand, we can’t allow the Iranians to continue to push in ways that are injurious to our vital interests.”

What’s with generals telling people to use moderation and diplomacy – don’t they want to see the Army bogged down in another mess and $500/barrel oil‽ Where is Blackwater going to find work since getting kicked out of Iraq for killing innocent civilians‽


1 Badtux { 09.17.07 at 7:57 pm }

Don’t worry about Blackwater. The Iraqi puppets may say they’re kicking Blackwater out, but they do not have the 82nd Airborne. As Nathan Bedford Forrest of Forrest’s Raiders fame was reputed to have said, it’s all about who can get there fustest with the mostest guns, and that’s the U.S. military (for the moment). The Iraqi prime minister can rant and rave, but until Iraq’s military has more guns than the U.S. military, what the U.S. military says, goes.

– Badtux the “Power grows from the barrel of a gun” Penguin

2 Bryan { 09.17.07 at 8:12 pm }

Blackwater provides all of the bodyguards, but this a definite problem for the “Iraq is a sovereign nation” claim.

3 Eric { 09.18.07 at 4:26 am }

What are they complaining about?!? According to the way Iraq’s own ministry described the incident, it was self-defense. (from the CNN article) “The ministry said the incident began around midday, when a convoy of sport utility vehicles came under fire from unidentified gunmen in the square. The men in the SUVs, described by witnesses as Westerners, returned fire, the ministry said.” Even the witnesses said they “returned fire”. I also have a hard time believing there were “civilians” injured. A “civilian” pointing a gun is no longer a civilian. The “civilians” that don’t privide the military with info to prevent these attacks, (and you know they know something) or that aren’t making any effort to help stop the fighting, or stablize their own country should not be considered civilians.

4 Bryan { 09.18.07 at 11:27 am }

Blackwater is not the police, nor the military, they are private citizens. Private citizens don’t get to “return fire” on crowds. Children are normally considered civilians.

Blackwater has no inherent right to open fire at random. Killing unarmed people by random fire, and firing automatic weapons is random, is a crime. The police in the US can’t do it, so why assume that civilians in Iraq can.

Blackwater has no standing beyond civilian in an Iraqi court. They are foreigners, and any sovereign nation has the right to expel foreigners, and to prosecute foreigners who violate their laws. There is no such thing as a “right of self defense.” It is a justification at trial, not a right.

5 Bryan { 09.18.07 at 4:27 pm }

Update: the self-defense claims are all coming from Blackwater and parroted by the State Department. The Iraqi police and victims say there was a car bombing a half hour before the convoy appeared, and when the convoy saw the smoking wreckage they opened fire. The witnesses say that Blackwater was the only group firing which is why the Iraqi government is upset.