Sunday, May 15, 2005

Iran's mullahs give Europeans "Ultimatum"

I don't know about others, but I'm pretty tired of these mullahs and their threats and intimidation. Somebody bomb Iran's nuke facilities. Now! Be done with it:

Iran's mullahs give Europeans "Ultimatum"

A senior mullahs' regime official here Saturday called on the Europeans to abandon threats and continue negotiations with Tehran to iron out the differences over the country's nuclear energy program or else. The remarks by the head of the Iranian negotiating team, Sirous Nasseri, came after the Europeans warned Iran of 'consequences' with British Prime Minister Tony Blair citing possible report to the UN Security Council if Tehran resumes uranium reprocessing. "The Europeans, and better than all Mr. Blair, well know that any threats on the part of Europe, leading to a confrontation with Iran, will be a big strategic blunder for Europe," he told at the end of a three-day visit. "Doubtless, if our path and that of the Europeans lead to a confrontation, the Europeans will be hurt the most, then the Americans, then the region and finally Iran. "Our final advice to the Europeans is that they put aside the language of threat since this will benefit them in the first place," Nasseri added.


At May 15, 2005 3:21 PM, Blogger simulev said...

A gift-present!
(from a LGF poster)

At May 15, 2005 3:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi fjordman,

sorry for this OT question but reading through English edition of Aftenposten I have noticed that the support for Fremskrittspartiet peaked at 28-30% in various opinion polls last year whilst today their support is estimated only at 18-21% (which is still above their results from 2001 - 15%).

Kind regards, Kledo Kamulos
If I were Norwegian I would vote for them, but what is the reason for such a decrease in your opinion?

At May 15, 2005 3:48 PM, Blogger Fjordman said...

"If I were Norwegian I would vote for them, but what is the reason for such a decrease in your opinion?"

The Progress Party will probably make their best elections ever this fall, even if they get 20%. I can't give you any rational reasons why the Socialists are in the lead, I sometimes don't understand this country myself. Plain stupidity, I suppose. The problem is that even our so-called "Conservative" party (Høyre) are pretty damned stupid when it comes to immigration and multiculturalism. The Left is just worse. It will be a disaster at a crucial moment for this nation if we get a Socialist majority from 2006, which seems likely right now.

At May 15, 2005 9:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I were Norwegian I would vote for them, but what is the reason for such a decrease in your opinion?

It really is as simple as going with what one is comfortable with. I'm sure Norwegians have been voting socialist for years, know the "evil" associated with it, and are comfortable with it. Going conservative would be too drastic, I presume for many Norwegians. At least in my opinon.

At May 16, 2005 5:31 AM, Blogger CDR Salamander said...

I'm a big fan of yours, but I get easily frustrated when I hear someone on the European Right state something to the effect "Somebody bomb Iran's nuke facilities."

Who could/would do that? Israel or the US. What are the two nations disliked by most Europeans? Israel and the US. Every time Israel or the US does something "preemptively" - dogs world wide howl at the high pitched screeching coming out of Brussels and its vassal states. It really gets old.

The better question is why Europe does not have the ability to make a strike themselves. The answer is that they have sacrificed their ability to project power to prop up their demographically unsupportable welfare states. The US is just one election away from returning to a traditional isolationism or another war away from being able to do anything else. That leaves Europe at the feet of the Mullahs. Sure, you have British and French nukes, but do you want to rely on them? Are you willing to sacrifice a couple of European cities, like Rome and Vienna, to hope that Paris or London will use their nukes in retaliation?

The better thing is to have an actionable conventional force. The Brit, French, Italian and Spanish mini-carriers and their impotent airgroups can't do it. The Vulcan bombers are gone. The Brit land attack cruise missiles can be counted with a short deck of cards.

Somebody indeed. Someday, Atlas may shrug and leave Europeans to fend for themselves until they are bled white, then "somebody" may come to help. It has happened twice in the last century. It is never wise to rely on others for your security. Europeans should know that better than anyone.

Negotiate from a position of weakness in that part of the world, and you will get taken to the cleaners every time.

At May 16, 2005 9:36 AM, Blogger solburger said...

It should be a French or a Brit bomber taking out the nuclear threat in Iran. That would be the best as it would show uniformity against the wackos of Islam. But Europe is toothless, and we, the Americans will have to do the job soon, before Israel get really pissed off and takes care of it themselves (which they have a right to do as they have been threatened.)
Once again, after doing the dirty work, the USA will be defamed endlessly in the European Press for inflaming Islam and the cause of the Islamic problem.

Iraq's liberation would have been done more easily with solidarity from France, Germany, Scandenavia, and a tiny bit of balance in the media.

It's truly disturbing to see news like Fjordman's and I wish Sweeden and Europe the best.

An American watching Europe now? It's like watching your beloved parents starting to lose their grip on reality.

At May 16, 2005 11:11 AM, Blogger Fjordman said...

"The better question is why Europe does not have the ability to make a strike themselves."

I am well aware of the fact that "somebody" won't be Europe. Europe doesn't have the capability to do so, even if it wanted to. We spend too much money on welfare and destroy our military and economy. I don't want to bomb Iran because I hate Iranians, I want to bomb because the alternative could very well become a nuclear war later on. Of course, if/when the Amnericans and the Israelis strike, you can be sure there will be demonstrations in every single European city against the American "cowboys" and George "Darth Vader" Bush.

At May 16, 2005 4:36 PM, Blogger Mike V. said...

Who could/would do that? Israel or ...

You already answered your own question. Remember who took out the Iraqi reactor at Osirak?

At May 16, 2005 4:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fjordman and anonymous at 9:35 PM, thanks for your answers.

Let us hope Frp will get about 20-25% percent at election.

Kledo Kamulos

At May 18, 2005 2:49 AM, Blogger jj mollo said...

Osirak was a one-time event. The Iranians, being aware of that history, will have protected their nuclear assets appropriately. These assets are located far from Israel in hardened sites, dispersed widely, mingled with civilian populations. Additional decoy sites are likely to be scattered about, disguised by disinformation. The general population of Iran supports the nuclear policies of the Mullahs, and any attack would solidify the Mullahs' control.

The only hope we have is using underground political techniques to unseat the Mullahs before the technology is in place. Most Iranians would like that, but it's not likely to happen in time. At some point Israel will attack, without much hope of success. They are very vulnerable and don't have much choice. The Mullahs are not good candidates for MAD style deterrence.

I suspect the US, Russian and the PRC will then become involved in unpredictable ways. Europe, except for the UK, will not have much to offer and will easily be threatened into neutrality anyway.

Europe needs to tighten their fiscal processes, increase military capacity in specialized areas, and take measures to assure and enhance the loyalty of their own citizens.


Post a Comment

<< Home