Iran declared war against the United States in 1978 and has never retracted that declaration. No President, neither Republican nor Democrat, has taken this threat with appropriate seriousness.
In the mid-late 1970s, President Carter eased the way for the Shaw of Iran to step down and allow the Ayatollah Khomeini to leave his exile in France and return to Iran. The Ayatollah supported "radical students" taking American Embassy personnel hostage for 444 days, sold our F15 and F16 aircraft to the Soviets, and took a modern Persian society and lurched it back in time some 400 years with frequent firing squads to bring home the point.
Since then, Iran has fought proxy wars with us through Lebanon and Syria, Lybia, Afghanistan, and stateless terrorists such as Al Qaeda. Now the leader of the embassy takeover is the President of Iran and they are on the verge of developing their own nuclear weapons.
President Clinton set up conditions for North Korea to become a nuclear power and President Bush sat idly by and allowed it to happen. That was bad. Perhaps the only saving grace is that as godless communists, dialectical materialism (Marxist lingo for pleasure in this life) is of paramount importance and the genuine threat of annihilation is capable of bringing restraint.
Not Iran. To Iran, the U.S. is the "Great Satan." Israel is a disease spreading "rotting corps" infecting the Middle East. The president of Iran has stated repeatedly that it is worth the destruction of his nation and the death of his people to destroy these enemies. After all, he and his people will be rewarded in Paradise by God. Is there any reason why we should not take him at his word?
At some point in the 1970s, my mom asked me if I was genuinely concerned that there would be nuclear was between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. I said yes. A lot has changed since then. This week, our president signed a treaty with Russia to reduce our nuclear stockpiles. This would have been welcome news in the 70s and 80s. However, it seems like misplaced priorities today.
While there is much to debate about the merits and detriments of this treaty, the pressing problems of the day are being ignored. Iran and its agents are the 800 pound gorilla in the room that no one wants to talk about.
The scary truth is that our enemies do not need intercontinental ballistic missiles or bombers to attack us with nuclear weapons. We are not presently prepared to shield ourselves from a modern nuclear attack.
Take a moment to think outside of the box. How could you make an asymmetrical nuclear attack on the U.S.? Remember, it was the failure to think this way that allowed us to be vulnerable to attack on Sept. 11, 2001.
Low-tech missiles, like Scuds, are easy to build "near ballistic" missiles. That means that they travel upward near the edge of our atmosphere before falling back to earth. That means that they have a range of up to a couple of thousand miles. Ballistic missiles go into orbit allowing them onto drop on any place on the Globe.
What would happen if is a nuclear armed scud were launched from a cargo ship or fishing boat 100 miles from our shores? Do we have the defensive posture to thwart such an attack at the present time? What if such a missile were launched with the intent to detonate it at the peak of it's trajectory causing an electromagnetic pulse to wipe out all of the computers under the blast? Would your car start without its computer? Would a tank or airplane? What would happen to our communication systems? What kind of asymmetrical attack could the military planners of Iran come up with?
In 2002 we toppled Afghanistan and placed our military there. That put us on the Eastern border of Iran. Shortly thereafter, we toppled Iraq and placed our military there. That put us on the Western border of Iran. We had them in a pincer and the Iranians were temporarily set back on their heals.
Since then, there have been many years of complacency. Since then, Iran has been emboldened. Iran has attacked our troops with "military advisors" in the ranks of our enemies and by arming the groups resisting our presence. By doing nothing with our strategic position and stunningly impressive victories President Bush cost us the best opportunity we have had since World War II to shape the Middle East. Now, by continuing to ignore the threat posed by Iran, President Obama risks the possibility of a devastating attack on us or our allies.
A Middle Eastern proverb states that if you intend to strike the head from a snake, it is better to do it when it is small. Atomic power is making Iran grow to enormous size.
It has been said that the Lord helps those who help themselves. If we won't see to our own security, if we won't properly address our enemies, who will help us?