Getting that Flight 93 Feeling About Iran

As the movie about United Flight 93 creeps toward theaters across America this month, and as the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui provides glimpses into the desperate last moments of the passengers and crew of that flight, we are reminded that, much as the passengers on that flight desperately wanted to live -- much as they courageously fought to save themselves and their nation -- they were already doomed once the hijackers took over their flight.

The passengers knew that their situation was dire.  The terrorists claimed to have a bomb.  For that reason alone, charging the cabin would mean a high risk of death.  But the passengers also knew, having learned that two other planes had been flown the same morning into the World Trade Center, that if they did nothing they would die.

What the passengers did not know was that as soon as they came close to taking over the cockpit, the terrorists would turn the plane upside down and slam it into a Pennsylvania field.

So at the moment when the passengers of Flight 93 realized the gravity of their situation on September 11, 2001, it was already too late.  They were already trapped in a situation with no good options -- each path leading to death.

Why?  Because the enemy had successfully laid his plans in secrecy, and executed them only when ready.  This put the innocent passengers and crew of Flight 93 at the terrorists' mercy.

Today, unfolding events involving Iran's nuclear ambitions are beginning to take on some of that same feeling that the passengers and crew of Flight 93 must have had as the awful reality of their situation became clear.  Some are still struggling with the realization that the threat is real.  Others are struggling with the realization that it may already be too late -- not because it is physically impossible to disarm Iran at this point, but because too many in America and around the world are still fighting tooth and nail against any effective action to stop Iran.  If their voices are allowed to prevail, they may well doom this flight.

We know this much about Iran at this point:

There is a real and immediate threat that Iran will acquire its first nuclear weapons within days or months, if it has not done so already.  Iran has already put in place at least 164 centrifuges and has begun to enrich uranium.  It intends to work quickly to put 54,000 centrifuges on line — a vast increase that will probably make Iran's nuclear ambitions a reality in days or months, not years.  Iran has already acquired missiles suitable for nuclear use.

Attempts by the U.N. and the European Union to cajole Iran into halting its nuclear program, including the best diplomatic efforts anyone on earth has been able to muster, have been tried, tried, really tried, and tried again, and are now a proven failure.

The threat is continuing to grow daily.  If we do not act promptly, it will become harder, and soon impossible, to stop Iran.

Iran is a brutal regime that has killed at least 10,000 of its own people and openly dreams of a world without America or Israel. (If any nations take comfort from the fact that they are not yet at the top of Iran's hit list, it is thin and temporary comfort indeed.)

The first tactic of the willfully ignorant is to repeat at face value Iran’s claim that only wants nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.  Strangely, many of the same people who can find the most evil unspoken motives in every act or omission of President Bush -- now plead naivete when it comes to understanding why Tehran wants nuclear power.  It is not enough for this crowd that Iran's parliament shouted "Death to America!" on the date that it voted to resume uranium enrichment.  (We heard those chants of "Death to America!" again at the news conference this week in which Iran's president announced the "good news" that Iran had succeeded in enriching uranium and therefore joined the "nuclear club.")  It is not enough for this selectively naive crowd that Iran has 130 billion barrels of oil reserves, and thus no compelling need for nuclear energy that would justify the trouble it is going to in defying the U.N.  It is not enough for this group even when Iran admits that it seeks nuclear weapons, or even when proof of Iran's nuclear weapons program comes to light.           

The second line of defense for the willfully ignorant is to pretend that there is still plenty of time left to resolve the Iranian problem.  The New York Times takes another stab at this approach again today, claiming that analysts say a nuclear Iran is years away.  This too, is foolishness.  The head of the U.N.'s own so-called "nuclear watchdog" agency, the IAEA, admitted in December that once Iran began enriching uranium, it would be only a matter of months before it acquired its first nuclear bomb.  Iran has done just that.  The window of relative safety may now have shrunk to a matter of days.

A U.S. State Department official said yesterday that Iran may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days if it goes ahead with plans to install thousands of centrifuges at its Natanz plant.  "Natanz was constructed to house 50,000 centrifuges,'' Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told reporters today in Moscow.  "Using those 50,000 centrifuges they could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon in 16 days.'' 

But does Iran really need to have all 54,000 centrifuges in place before it can make one or two nuclear weapons?  No.

Indeed, based on Iran's behavior and belligerence in recent years, it is possible that it already has one or two nuclear weapons.

Claims that it will take Iran another 5 or 10 years to acquire nuclear weapons are laughably preposterous in light of the fact that Iran has had a secret nuclear program for 18 years, in light of the speed with which other nations have acquired nuclear weapons, and in light of the speed with which Iran is putting all elements of its nuclear program into effect. 

Those who have warned that Iran is proceeding rapidly with its nuclear plans have been proven right.  If nothing else, as the Washington Post points out, Iran's rapid nuclear progress announced this week "ought to prompt some rethinking about how long it might be before the Iranian regime can back up, with a nuclear weapon, its president's threat to wipe Israel from the map."

And how bizarre it is to assume that there is nothing to know about Iran's nuclear program that is not already public knowledge.  That assumes that Iran has told the U.N. everything there is to know about Iran's nuclear program.  (That would be a first.)  While Iran will encounter a few delays in setting up all 54,000 centrifuges, what can it do with half of them?  Or a tenth?  Or with materials Iran may already have obtained on the black market from other sources?  It might be 5 years before Iran is ready to detonate its first nuclear weapon, but do you want to bet your life on it?  And mine?

Why would anyone even want to climb out onto the weak limb of assuming that it will take at least 5 or 10 more years for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons?  There are reasons.  They are not good reasons, but they exist.  Some want to delay Iran's day of reckoning.  Others don't want to admit that Iran poses a real and immediate threat to the safety of other civilized nations.  Doing so might require putting aside, for a time, or for a single issue, their perpetual political animosity toward America's current president.  If it sounds as if I am accusing some of putting their own partisan political ambitions ahead of their own safety or the safety of all Americans, then you are hearing me correctly.  If there was ever an issue that required concerted, unanimous action from America and the world, this is it.

The stakes for the personal safety of Americans and other civilized, decent people could not be higher.  Nothing less than the fate of the civilized world is at stake, without exaggeration.

If George Bush does not act to disarm Iran, there is a very real likelihood that no other world leader will have the courage to do so.  The nations of the European Union are just beginning to acknowledge the gravity of the situation, but their learning curve is far too slow and their resolve to confront danger effectively very tenuous.  By the time their slow awakening is finished, Iran's nuclear program will be too far advanced to stop.

America's White House does not operate in a vacuum. If enough people go out of their way to undermine efforts by the Administration to get tough with Iran -- if enough engage in a steady stream of personal or partisan attacks on the president and his Administration, such as false comparisons of Iran's situation with that of Iraq -- they may well succeed in preventing the White House from taking any effective action against Iran in time to avoid a nuclear disaster.  In the end, they and their children will pay an awful price for that choice -- and so will I, and mine.

Some have lost sight of the big picture when it comes to national security.  From the fact that nuclear weapons were not found in Iraq they conclude that America cannot or should not take any action (short of ineffectual talk) to prevent Iran from racing forward with a nuclear program that can easily be turned to miltary use.  They have learned the wrong lesson from the Iraq war.  As Mark Twain said, "Be always careful not to take too much from an experience. A cat, having sat upon a hot stove lid, will never again sit upon a hot stove lid. Nor upon a cold stove lid."

What hasn't worked -- what has conclusively Failed, with a capital "F" -- is trying to win Iran over through diplomacy, negotiation, and endless second chances.  Let's remember who we are dealing with here.  Iran's current regime is well known for its repression of the human rights of its own people.  As mentioned above, some 10,000 have been executed by the repressive Islamic regime.  Iran has a track record of hostility to the interests of the U.S., Israel, and other Western nations.

Suggesting that we rely on diplomacy to stop Iran is akin to suggesting that the passengers of Flight 93 should have saved themselves by using "diplomacy" on their hijackers.  Diplomacy has no magical powers.  By way of illustration, Bill Clinton -- supposedly a suave persuader of the first order -- was unable, using all the skills he could muster and the supposed diplomatic talents of Madeleine Albright and the State Department, to prevent the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, the attack on the Khobar towers in Saudi Arabia, the first World Trade Center bombing, other terrorist attacks on U.S. embassies and interests, or even the beginning of preparations for the September 11, 2001 attacks.  All the diplomatic skills of Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter didn't keep Iran from taking 52 Americans hostage in 1979 and holding them for 444 days.

Diplomacy is not a magic formula for avoiding threats from hostile nations.  Here's what diplomacy really is:  It's asking nicely, or it's asking with a stick in one hand.  We've tried asking nicely.  We haven't tried using a stick.  Nobody has even picked up a stick yet.  And Iran is proceeding very rapidly with its nuclear program, thank you very much.

Flight 93 will take to the air again soon in America's movie theaters and in our collective memories.  But are America, Israel, and their allies now on their way to another Flight 93?  Will innocent men, women and children soon find their lives, futures and dreams hijacked by madmen whose firm and definite intent is to kill them all without mercy? 

There is time still, as the plane waits at the gate, for us to avoid this risk.  There is a time when we can still work together to take effective action.  But if we pretend that nothing is amiss with Iran, and quietly board this flight and fasten our seatbelts, safety is the last thing we will find. The choices were are forced to make, too late and from a position of weakness, will no longer be enough to save us.

_____________________________________

For additional background on the threat posed by Iran, click here.

Comments

[JTk]

Very well said, I think that you have outlined the Iranian issues as well as I have seen anywhere else on the net.

I have taken the liberty of adding your blog to our list of quality blogs.

Thanks for your time,

JTk