• Notes From Dave
  • my thoughts on some of the tough issues of short-term missions
  • God's Politics
  • jim wallis' smart, political, and God centered take on the issues of today
  • Progressive Eruptions
  • the liberal side of politics from shaw kenawe. a daily read of mine.
  • Conservatism With Heart
  • a conservative take on life and politics from a well connected missouri mom
  • Truthdig
  • left of center, and very informative. bob scheer's online journal
  • Coffee Klatch
  • home of the best coffee roaster in So. Cal. and where i learned to love coffee
  • The Coffee Geek
  • everything you need to know about coffee and how to make a great cup o' joe
  • Bleacher Report
  • varied sports blog, lots of attitude, and sometimes i'm a featured writer
  • Aubievegas
  • a mix of sports in general with a bent towards vegas and auburn
My Photo
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

I am a self proclaimed coffee addict and Executive Director of a non profit missions agency working primarily in the Mexican cities of Oaxaca, Guadalajara, and Ensenada. I've been married for over 30 years to Chelle, and we have one grown son, Joseph, a graduate of Auburn University in Alabama.

Powered by Blogger

Friday, March 09, 2012

Barbara Ann and Bomb Iran... How America should handle the current Iranian crisis

Many are aware of John McCain's lame attempt at humor during the 2008 presidential campaign when he sang "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" to the tune of the Beach Boys Barbara Ann.

It was lame then.

It is dangerous now, because he means it.

We have been treated in recent days to numerous politicians calling on us to essentially start the bombing runs now. We have heard how the United States has a moral obligation to the rest of the world to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

The solution, advocated from the presidential candidates to sitting political poo-bahs is to bomb them Iran into submission. And while we are at it, at least according to McCain, let's get Syria too.

Who knows, perhaps this would work, but I for one appreciate the fact that President Obama is not rushing headlong into another war. However I am not convinced he can resist the political pressures to "save Israel" in an election year.

Everyone with half a functioning brain should know that the good old US of A does not have a boatload of money floating around, and that war costs not only lives, but money.

Also, everyone knows that our last few forays into war have gone less that swimmingly.

So what are we to do?

Our country has always felt a strong need to support Israel, a small democratic outpost in a pretty hostile Middle East. I get that. I also understand that Iran has been a troublemaker in the region for years, as has Syria, who currently is wiping out their own citizenry on a daily basis.

At some point in time though, others in the world must learn to step up to the plate and fight for their interests.

Here's how this works.

If other Middle Eastern governments are worried about Iran and Syria, let them bomb them. Why can't the Saudi Air Defense Force and our other allies in the region, fully stocked with US made F-15's do the job? If they are not willing to risk their blood and treasure, in their own backyard, why should we?

Now I know at times, it is in the best interests of the US to act unilaterally. However, that does not necessarily mean without the American people.

So, to President Obama, Senator McCain, our presidential candidates, and all the rest of you politicos, here's what I want before you get my support...
  • Come to us publicly and make your case. Treat us with respect and ask for our opinion, before the planes take off!
  • Tell us how we are paying for this. If you want me to support another war, show me the money. If this means raising taxes to pay for it, that's fine. But this deal where our wars are off budget is bull-puckey. If you are unwilling to risk your job to raise taxes to pay for a war that you believe is in our interests, perhaps you do not really believe in it.
  • Finally, declare war! Has there been a more devastating trend after World War II than our reluctance to declare war? If our boys and girls are going to die for our country, the least our politicians can do is respect them enough to declare war and do the job right.
Now I am sure there are all sorts of reasons why these simple suggestions will not be heeded.

But that does not mean those reasons make any sense...

Comments on "Barbara Ann and Bomb Iran... How America should handle the current Iranian crisis"


Blogger BB-Idaho said ... (2:50 PM) : 

The US and Iran go back quite away. That story has some odd twists . Now, we hear from the former Israeli Intelligence
Chief (who, like Obama) urges a
rational approach.


Blogger Dave Miller said ... (3:15 PM) : 

BB, yes, that history is pretty interesting... our history in the Middle East does not lead to real easy election sloganeering


Blogger Shaw Kenawe said ... (3:39 PM) : 

I have an idea. Those who are itching for a fight with Iran should send their young sons and daughters into the maw of war first.

(I have a nephew who served in Afghanistan and is now studying Pashtun in the language school in Monterey, CA).


Blogger Dave Miller said ... (7:06 PM) : 

Shaw, I know people who have worked at that school. I hear it is fantastic.

The underlying idea behind your suggestion is, I believe, a good one.

If more congressmen thought their kids would be going, they be less ready vote for whatever the next war would be.


Blogger BB-Idaho said ... (7:59 AM) : 

With the way our strong arm foreign policy has worked over the last couple of generations, you'd think hawks would be an endangered species...


Blogger dmarks said ... (8:05 AM) : 

BB: We haven't had a strong-arm foreign policy.

Fighting back against Saddam Hussein after 10 years of his cease fire violations (which included military attacks, stockpiling of WMD, blocking inspections, and promoting terrorism), is not any rush to war. Nor was there any rush to war after giving the government of Afghanistan a rather long to do what could have been done in minutes (turning over the 9/11 master minds)

"If more congressmen thought their kids would be going, they be less ready vote for whatever the next war would be."

I am strongly opposed to such an idea. These issues need to be decided on merit, without tricks like this.


Blogger Z-man said ... (8:33 AM) : 

Dave I pretty much agree with everything you said in your blogpost.


Blogger Dave Miller said ... (8:37 PM) : 

Well thank you Z-man...

Dmarks, why is it a trick? It is a simple fact that people with no skin in the game are a lot quicker on the trigger... I just want a little more introspection...

As for Afghanistan and Iraq, I was for the Afghanistan operation, yet against the Iraq mess, believing we could've contained Saddam with a lot less lives lost and for a lot less $$$.

I think our leaders should have had to explain why we needed to attack iraq, and not the other countries around the world that are brutal with their people and have nuclear weapons...

We attacked Iraq simply because we could... and with little or no planning for the end of the war.

There is absolutely nothing we did right in that conflict. We sealed no borders, allowing countless bad guys to escape and either made horrible or wrong decisions at every step of the way, starting with the lame decision to enter that sand box...


Blogger BB-Idaho said ... (5:52 AM) : 

RE: "BB: We haven't had a strong-arm foreign policy."
..according to the US military
we haven't been pussy-footing around the fertile crescent. As a former Army chemical officer, I
was disappointed in the WMD excuse,
a phoney PR excercise..and told my congressman so well before our
'preemptive' invasion. My nephew
and my son-in-law served tours in
Iraq and a neighbor boy is buried
at Arlington.


Blogger dmarks said ... (4:35 AM) : 

"I think our leaders should have had to explain why we needed to attack iraq, and not the other countries around the world that are brutal with their people and have nuclear weapons..."

For one thing, Iraq attacked us. It violated the cease fire by firing on peacekeeping patrols hundreds of times. For another, it was promoting and hosting dozens of terrorist groups. Saddam was a major terrorist kingpin, after all. After 9/11 it made little sense to let such aggression continue.

You are right though about the poor planning. But there was a lot we did right. For one thing, even with the war. the death toll in Iraq went down compared to what it was during the Saddam years. And Iraq is no longer exporting terrorism. If Denis Kucinich and the pro-terrorist faction in Congress had their way, Saddam Hussein would still be in power, attacking his neighbors, trying to exterminate the Jews, and killing tens of thousands of citizens a year. Instead, now, even though it is higher than it should be, the number of people being killed by terrorists/war actions/etc in Iraq is a lot more comparable to what goes on in LA County, as opposed to being the killing fields it was under Saddam.

And sorry, I strongly disagree with the "skin in the game" argument. Very strongly. It is dereliction of their duty if they act on any factors other than how it affects the nation as a whole. No on how it affects them personally.

It is bad here, and bad if they vote on tax bills with any regards to how the changes in tax law affect them personally.

BB: What was pre-emptive about the invasion?


Blogger Dave Miller said ... (11:49 AM) : 

DMarks, you can disagree all you want, but of you don't think people will make different decisions if their loved ones are in harms way, you're smokin' crack...

As for your snippy comment to BB about a pre-emptive in Iraq, all we, as people who stood against the Iraq war can point to regarding that is to point to sources like the one in the link that in fact reference the Bush Doctrine of Preemption.



Blogger Dave Miller said ... (12:06 PM) : 

DMarks... here's the quote, from President Bush, that explained the Doctrine of which BB speaks, and which you, for some reason, fail to acknowledge..

"We cannot defend America and our friends by hoping for the best. We cannot put our faith in the word of tyrants, who solemnly sign non-proliferation treaties, and then systemically break them. If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long — Our security will require transforming the military you will lead — a military that must be ready to strike at a moment's notice in any dark corner of the world. And our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives."


post a comment