Victor Davis Hanson: On choosing between "bad" and "worse," when faced with prospect of a nuclear Iran.... with a "messianic nihilist at the helm....
Hanson narrows down our choices, and those of other Western nations and Israel to:
“Bad and worse” is now the conventional wisdom regarding our choices in dealing with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s efforts to obtain the bomb. We are told that Western air strikes will lead to violent reactions in the Islamic world; increase terrorism; empower the Iraqi Shiite obstructionists; destroy the much ballyhooed but little heard from Iranian opposition; and that even after days of bombing, we will be unable to level all Iran’s nuclear facilities. That’s the “bad” option we face....
“Worse” means they get the bomb — which results in a nuclear Iran threatening Israel, U.S. troops in the Middle East, neighboring Arab oil exporters, and European capitals, even as Western liberals bicker over whether Ahmadinejad seeks merely status, high oil prices, greater power over a restless populace — or paradise as his reward for destroying the Jewish state...."
Hanson goes on to describe Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as "....a leader who listens to voices in a well, dreams about the missing 12th imam, claims his audiences can’t blink while he talks, and may have been one of the terrorists who stormed the U.S. embassy in 1979 — adding messianic nihilism to the tinderbox of petrodollars, nukes, and terrorism...."
And he characterizes the role of the United States, in response to the ravings and threats of Ahmadinejad, as follows: "In response, Zen-like, the United States keeps silent in the background...."
Hanson also tells us something most Americans don't know about the man whom I consider to have been the most dangerous and damaging former U.S. President to the national security of the United States of America---Bill Clinton---who "last year apologized to the Iranian mullocracy for American support for the Shah 30 years ago and CIA espionage a half century past, but not to the American people for allowing Pakistan, Iran, and North Korea to begin in earnest their nuclear acquisition programs on his watch...." And, he goes on to predict that "....indeed, the closer Iran gets to the bomb, the more the Left will say that we can live with it...."
Hanson concludes that: "All that has changed in the past six months is the growing Western realization that radical Islam thrives on appeasement, and really does mean what it says.... Far from withdrawing his pledge to wipe Israel out, President Ahmadinejad doubled-down on the boast.... (and) outlined in advance not merely the intent but the method of his intended follow-up to the Holocaust.
We are coming to a showdown where the headshaking over “bad or worse” is no longer an excuse for inaction, but a tragic acceptance that there is still a bad choice, after all...."
Personally, I believe that a "bad choice" is the best we're going to get in facing down the threat of nuclear terrorism---with a lunatic "messianic nihilist's" finger on the nuclear button. Far better to deal with "bad" now, than deal with saving this country---or Israel---after "worse" is manifest in the shape of a nuclear mushroom cloud.
Related article: "Islamist protest in N.Y. – 'Mushroom cloud on way' Rally at Israeli consulate features picture sof Muslim flags flying over White House," here.