I can’t say that the now-infamous letter to Iran that was written by Senator James Cotton and signed by an additional 46 senators from the Party of No Brains is a treasonous document, but the letter shows that we have a either a gang of psychotics or hopeless morons calling the shots in Capitol Hill these days. I mean, this is some mucus-minded stuff that I would expect from the House of Representatives.
Running a decision tree on the “no nuclear deal with Iran” tactic the PoNBs wants to use will reveal a missing component: a sensible alternative.
For example, what happens next if we say “No nuclear power whatsoever for you, Iran”?
My guess is that Iran, a country which has not broken any international statute governing nuclear energy or nuclear weapons at this point, will take on the “We are grown-azzed adults, you can’t tell us what to do” posture, and will continue its nuclear research program.
So…if Iran decides to continue its research—without a weapons angle—then what’s the next move? More economic sanctions? Well, remember how North Korea developed nuclear missiles—while under sanctions?
What’s next? More covert action? That didn’t work before.
Okay, how about an airstrike? That’s dumb. Once the bombing stops, Iran may REALLY start building nukes.
I guess the answer would then have to be MORE airstrikes, right? Okay, this is beginning to look expensive, not to mention that endless airstrikes alone will not stop Iran’s nuclear program.
There’s only one way to shut down Iran: an invasion…Iraq style! But executing this brilliant idea likely means you’ll need a double order of occupation on the side since having massive numbers of US troops living in Iran is—since we’re dabbling in the hypothetical neurosis zone at the moment—the best way to partially ensure that not a single atom is smashed within the Islamic Republic.
On that last point, occupying Iran would be much more difficult than whatever the hell America tried to do with Iraq during that occupation adventure. I also think that America camping out in yet another Muslim country with fairy-tale WMD evidence as justification will not work well with the rest of the world and give birth to even more jihadists.
Let’s continue to follow the logic of using bombs to solve this Iran probblem. Take a good guess why nations don’t typically think about bombing nuclear power plants? Because doing so is dangerous, deadly, and therefore dumb. Depending on how the wind blows, bombing a nuclear plant could cause widespread contamination which can easily spread outside of Iran, resulting in hundreds of thousands of casualties or higher.
Assuming contamination risk has any validity, I want you to look at a map of Iran. Do you think Russia is going to look at its backyard, watch nuclear power plants being bombed, and then say, “Splendid job, America! Stop by for tea when you’re done”? I would guess that bombing Iran would also mean flirting with a larger war. And contrary to the post-Cold War rhetoric, Beating Russia isn’t going to be easy. I’m not saying the US would lose, but fighting Russia would be more costly than most Americans think. Also, consider how the US would react if Russia or China began bombing any nation other than the US in the Western Hemisphere…
Okay, I’m done touring through Crazyland. Am I misinterpreting the No-Deal logic? Hit me in the comments…
song currently stuck in my head: “i love a man in a uniform” – gang of four