March 8, 2012 American Party
In National Security

The media seems incapable, or unwilling, to provide real insight for citizens into the Administration?s policies in Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq. We don?t have a staff of foreign policy experts – yet – but we?re willing to offer what we believe to be some honest insights into U.S. policy because we think citizens should begin to understand the difference between the two current political parties and what the American Party may seek to do.

In our last post we lamented the fact that the Bush Administration did not obtain a permanent security alliance with Iraq such as we have with South Korea. Nor did it get concessions on Iraqi oil which could have eventually repaid some of the $1.9 trillion spent. The Bush Administration should have worked with the U.N. from the earliest days of the Coalition Provisional Government to make this happen.

In Afghanistan we are in the 11th year of what was originally expected to be a 20 year campaign. The monthly cost exceeds $6 billion, and we have over 17,000 U.S. KIA or wounded. This is now the longest war in U.S. history, and it is far from clear that the Afghan National Army will be able to prevent terrorism and the Taliban from returning once international forces pull out for good in 2014. If not, our sacrifices will have been largely wasted. This war was initiated on October 7, 2001 by the Bush Administration in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Progress towards an Israeli-Palestinian agreement is non-existent. As we see it, President Obama has been adeptly boxed in by Israel. PM Netanyahu said this week that Israel will, at its sole discretion, retain the option to attack Iran?s nuclear facilities and may not inform the U.S. before it does so. President Obama?s response: ?I have Israel?s back?. This sounds like an open-ended commitment in which the U.S. may have to finish whatever Israel starts while taking casualties in the process. If so, we could also say goodbye to any hope of an Israeli-Palestinian two-state solution in the foreseeable future. It is not the American way and is indicative of a not-very-savvy Administration. The notion that Israel, a nation of only 8 million people, should feel that it has no option but to initiate an illegal, unsanctioned war with Iran is absurd. The very fact that it is being discussed indicates weak U.S. policy. Ultimately U.S. national security is at stake here along with the national security of many other countries. If Iran builds the bomb we all understand that it won?t be too long before a few ICBMs are aimed at the Great Satan, to use Iran?s term for the U.S. Then we will have to live under constant threats from the ayatollahs.

There are no good options. The fanatical regime in Iran has said time and time again that it will not yield to the world community. Iranian government advisor Ahmad Bakhshayesh recently said, ?The U.S. has no other option than to compromise on our stances and accept our nuclear program.?

This is a problem for the big ?5+1? countries to handle, not Israel. We think the U.S. should lead by immediately starting to work within the U.N. to form a consensus that Iran?s nuclear facilities must be taken out unless Iran complies fully with the IAEA, now and in the future. The U.N. could set a deadline date in 2012 for full Iranian compliance with the IAEA. That should be the policy ? work within a U.N. framework and make sure Israel stays on the sidelines. We should permanently end the possibility of an Iranian threat and avoid any further proliferation of nuclear weapons. The 21st century must be spent reducing worldwide stockpiles of nuclear weapons, not adding to them.


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)

Follow by Email