First They Claimed It Was Too Early to Stop Iran; Now We're Hearing It's Too Late

Just as I predicted.

First the appeasers argued that it was far too early to worry about stopping Iran's nuclear ambitions.  Iran was five, ten or more years away from nuclear weapons, they argued.  Evidence to the contrary was ignored or dismissed.

Now -- having burned up precious months and years endlessly discussing the problem and playing with their cherished but useless skills of diplomacy, they've begun to argue that it's already too late.

Did I miss it?  Was there one precious moment in time when in the minds of the left it was neither too early nor too late to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons capability, using force if necessary?

No.  There was no such moment when the left urged action to stop Iran.  Thus, the left chose what we already have or will soon have:  An Iran armed with nuclear weapons.

Nuclear proliferation has become or will soon become a reality in our time.  The mullahs and madmen in Iran with their fingers itching on the trigger are not noted for their mercy.  When they hang people -- as they often do -- they do it by lifting them with cranes so as to maximize the torture of their slow deaths by strangulation.

The truth is that it's still not too late to stop Iran.  Nor is it too early.  Nor is it an obligation we can afford to ignore.  That's a message some don't want to hear.  But the alternative will be much, much worse.

Comments

[Keith]

Now Gina, you know very well the Left will be able to point to the exact day and time we should have dealt with Iran. They just choose to not share their insight on this topic until the 2012 election; you know, once they have a clearer understanding of how it all turned out. We must not rush into these things, you know. Always better to choose a side after all the facts are in and the events have finished unfolding one way or the other. Otherwise they might find themselves saying things like "Had I known then what I know now, I never would have voted for _______ (fill in the blank)"

[benning]

The military begged Congress, for years, to strengthen the defenses of Guam, prior to World War II. Congress didn't want to waste a penny - at the time, maybe $5 million. The American defenders of Guam had little more, to fight off the Japanese, than hand weapons. When the US had to retake Guam from the Japanese it cost inumerable precious lives, and money. Then Congress said nothing as over $120 million was poured into Guam to make it a Military warehouse for the war effort. This has been the history of the U.S.Congress. Ignore a problem until it is too late. Then pretend to interest and pour money at the problem they could have solved in the first place.