If we’re charging an official of the Iranian government with complicity or worse in this plot, then it ceases to be a law enforcement issue and becomes a military and political issue instead. This isn’t a case of espionage but of sabotage or worse, which would be an act of war by anyone’s definition. If we’re not willing to respond in kind, we then send a signal to hostile nation-states around the world that attacks on the US are low-risk, high-reward affairs — and we’d better get ready for an avalanche of them.If the Iranian government is willing to commit an act of war against the United States, then the law enforcement model doesn't apply. It's war, plainly and simply. The bombs should start falling on Tehran this afternoon. We've got to send a clear signal. A signal that even Imadinnerjacket can't ignore.
UPDATE** It seems as if the plotters thought that they were talking to a Mexican drug gang to commit the assassinations they wanted done. Barry Rubin at Pajamas Media asks the question:
if that had happened might the Mexican drug cartel have used weapons sold to them in a U.S. government program sponsored by the Justice Department to kill U.S. citizens in Washington DC?Oh, snap!
2 comments:
I don't see the current administration doing a damn thing... sigh
One act of war deserves another. This does not quite rise to the level of settling it from the runways of Barksdale AFB, but we COULD tell the Mad Mullahs that, after a date certain, they will ship no more oil from Kharg Island. The day before, we take out their submarine force, then we seize or sink any tanker calling there to load, preferably BEFORE they load.
Without oil revenues, the Mad Mullahs don't last 3 months.
Post a Comment