A person at this point should be able to look back and ask why is it that presidents who are opposed to each other wind up in the same places to fight wars. What are the fundamental aspects of the USG that require preservation through kinetic action in a shithole? What is the overriding factor that causes uniparty agreement on war?
Well, the overriding one is a clear and present danger to our interests and our citizens.
In the mid 1998, just before the Embassy bombings, the Agency tracked Osama to a hunting camp called Tarnak Farms. They could have bombed, commando'd, snatched or put cruise missiles on him and smoked him before Al Qaeda really took off. Clinton's cabinet dithered. We ended up with 20 years of war. (yeah, yeah, I know, George Bush and the Jews knocked down the Twin Towers and Osama had nothing to do with it... I heard...)
The mission was called off because some third-tier Emirates prince had his plane parked at the airport and noone wanted to risk pissing off some Trucial State royal family by accidentally killing or traumatizing a third-rate princeling supposedly just there hunting lions. (I am sure no briefcases of cash were there whatsoever.)
If there was one (or a few dozen) things we should have learned from the last century, it's that pre-emption has its place. The problem with it is that when you preempt something, you can't go "Look what we stopped." Because "it" doesn't happen. Or something else does. And everyone says "see, your hit did no good."
As much as the political hacks on the 7th floor of Langley and the Hoover building piss me off. The organizations do know what they are doing. In addition, they work to try and make sure successes are kept quiet but allow failures to leak out. Because looking like Keystone Cops is a sure way to make sure your enemy doesn't know if you are good or not.
We will probably never know exactly how close the Mullah's were. But I am quite convinced they were close. It was an engineering problem at this point. There have been enough sources (including UN and IAEA which is anything but a shill for the US and Israel) And I posted a few weeks ago that I thought they might explode a weapon by July 1 (and some others smartly posted back that they might do their test on 9/11). Regardless. We aren't going to know how close they are. Because now they aren't close.
As for 'well China or Russia or the Norks could just give them an atom bomb' and they could use it. Not hardly. The fissionable material in such a weapon can be traced not just to the country that made it... but to which corner of a very large reactor produced it! Analysis of the fallout materials would instantly say "Chinese Weapon. Russian Weapon. Nork Weapon." Making that an act of war by one of those countries.
Last, yup, Israel may or may not have bombs. They have never tested one. If they have the several hundred that it is presumed they have... then it is unlikely that any have "American" material in them at this point. That may have been the case in the 1960's when it is 'assumed' that either the US gave them material. Or the Israeli's managed to smuggle out... something... and process it. At this point, they are in violation of saying "We neither confirm nor deny we have atomic weapons." While we all know they have them... if they haven't tested, deny they have them and noone can (or will) prove otherwise... then what do you do to them? They have not sat around and said "We will nuke anyone." Unlike the Mullah's... who have been saying since 1979 that they will get a bomb and use it.
Don't forget Saddam and Osirak, too. The Israeli's did a hell of a job ending that threat... Oh yeah, and we publically condemned the Israeli's. While the whole ME danced in quiet.
So after a night of reflection... I think we probably did the right thing. Now, if we can just sit back and avoid the urge to "Nation Build" or get into regime changing... when it is the job of the Iranian People to Regime Change and build 'back' a nation that was the most advanced in the region in 1979 when it got dialed back 700 years or so because of the Religion of Peace.
As for everyone whining about Trump and saying how bad he is... Reagan used to say "A man who is 80 percent my friend and 20 percent my enemy is still my friend." We are a very independent-minded nation and we all have opinions and worldviews and preferences and prejudices and personal goals, etc. We are NEVER going to find anyone who is 100 percent with us as President. Or Senator. Or General. Or commentator. Or, for that matter, as fellow members of Snipers Hide. And if everyone 'was' in complete agreement, the place would be really boring or we would be victims of some seriously good propaganda.
So I'll happily say that I am still sort of split on whether this was good or bad. But leaning towards the good. And even if I did decide that this was a YUGE mistake at some point... I'm still going to be in the 80 percent good camp... and support a guy who is a real tonic after 8 years of Bush, 8 years of Obama and 4 years of a drooling potato with an autopen and a whole office full of compromised commie scum.
Still waiting for the post-strike photos. Be nice to run some of our 'national technical means' that detect radiation to see how well the enriched material is buried. 300 feet of rock is not a bad radiation blocker. Of course they have a 3,000 year history over there of burrowing into tombs to loot them. So you never know... they might already have 10-year olds with picks and shovels pretending to mine Lithium digging their way to find some chunks of U235...
Well, I had extra bacon this morning. I am doing my part for America.
Sirhr
www.euronews.com
