One Voice
What's yours saying
One voice’s opinion.
Read it and decide for yourself. Such actions and choices are still available despite the George Soros filthy money backing protests to deny you such.
By the way, it’s now come to light that Soros money helped back the 2014 Ukraine government overthrow sanctioned by U.S. Neocons ultimately leading to names like Zelensky, Nuland, Blinken and Sullivan entering American households.
The "America First" Case For Bombing Iran
“In summary, as can be gleaned by the responses to my [previous] post, those opposed to America assisting Israel in destroying Iran’s nuclear reactors make the following arguments:
It’s not our problem. We shouldn’t put U.S. lives at risk for Israel’s war. It risks dragging us into another war like the Great War on Terror. It is a waste of taxpayer money. And one shouldn’t take Bill’s advice because he is Jewish and supports Israel.
In response to the above, I thought it would be helpful to make a purely America First argument for our assisting Israel in destroying Iran’s nuclear capability.
Iran’s Principal Target is the United States as the ‘Great Satan’
Iran has made it entirely clear that Israel is not their only target. The Iranian leadership has for decades continually called not only for “Death to Israel,” but also for “Death to America” as the “Great Satan.” Iranian sponsorship of terror in the U.S. and its continued progress in its ballistic missile program create serious, longer-term threats to our safety and security at home and abroad.
Low Energy Costs are Threatened by a Nuclear Capable Iran
Putting aside the direct risks to our homeland, a nuclear Iran would threaten global energy production and increase energy costs in America with Iran’s ability to strike Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the other Gulf states, and its ability to control and interfere with shipping in the Middle East. So even if you don’t care about Israel and you only care about the price of gas at the pump, you don’t want Iran to have the nuke.
Iran Denuded of Its Nuclear Threat Sets up the Potential for a More Peaceful Middle East and Reduces Risks to Civilians
A denuclearized Iran and the destruction of the IRGC leadership, which is well underway as I write this post, create the potential for a much more peaceful Middle East as Iran has been the largest sponsor of terror in the Middle East with its funding of Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.
For example, without Iran’s support, Hamas would not have been emboldened to invade Israel on October 7th, and Israel would not have been forced to respond to extirpate Hamas, with the collateral damage to civilians created by a terrorist group embedded in tunnels under schools, hospitals, and homes.
By limiting the funding for and terrorist acts of Hamas and other Iranian proxies, you also minimize the risk to civilians of the inevitable responses to these terrorist acts.
Iran’s Proxies in the Region Have Caused Shipping Costs and Global Risk Premiums to Rise
The Houthis have attacked more than 100 ships as well as our bases in Iraq and Syria, killing sailors and harming our military personnel while massively disrupting trade. The result has been substantially increased shipping costs, which are ultimately borne by U.S. businesses and consumers.
Our military and navy have recently responded to these attacks at considerable economic cost to our country and risk to our military. Eliminating Iran’s nuclear threat and the IRGC’s funding of the Houthis will dramatically reduce these costs and risks.
Massive Peace Dividends for the United States (and the World) Will Emerge Without the Iranian Threat
Reducing the funding for Iran’s proxies in the region creates the potential for further progress with the Abraham Accords, setting up the region for greater economic progress and peace. A more peaceful Middle East will become an even greater contributor to the global economy and a massive source of business for U.S. companies and their employees as Saudi, Qatar, and the other Gulf States modernize and diversify their economies, a peace dividend that the U.S. is uniquely positioned to cash.
The Risk and Cost to the U.S. Assisting Israel in Destroying Iran’s Nuclear Capability is Limited Once Israel is Nearly Finished with the Job
Over the last three days, Israel has made remarkable progress in eliminating Iran’s air defenses, destroying IRGC leadership, nuclear scientists and police leadership, and beginning to degrade Iran’s nuclear capability. Iran will soon be largely defenseless, certainly from the air. Unfortunately, however, Israel will only be able to delay Iran’s nuclear capability and not destroy it without our assistance, in particular, without our bombers and massive ordinance penetration bombs.
President @realDonaldTrump has made clear as recently as yesterday that he cannot allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon:
For those people who say they want peace -- you can't have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon. So for all of those wonderful people who don't want to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon -- that's not peace.
To complete the mission, our military and our assets are needed to destroy Iran’s nuclear assets. Doing so does not require troops on the ground. It can be accomplished from the air in a few days at relatively low cost.
Importantly, there is no real risk of “being dragged into a long war” as our role here is simply a short-term tactical participation in Israel’s battle. In fact, if we were able to lend these assets to Israel, and the IAF were sufficiently trained to use them, the Israelis could do it themselves.
There is also no real risk that our assistance here causes Iran to become a bigger threat to the U.S. The opposite is the case. The IRGC and its leadership already consider us their most important enemy. We are already assisting Israel by defending them from Iranian missiles and drones with U.S. aircraft, naval warships, and personnel, and by sharing intelligence.
Furthermore, Israel is clearly in process on achieving regime change in Iran in response to the IRGC targeting Israeli civilians in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Haifa etc. rather than military targets. I would surmise, therefore, that the IRGC is not likely to be in power in Iran for much longer. An obvious tell is that the IRGC and their families have been leaving the country on private planes over the last two days.
A denuclearized Iran with new leadership is much lower risk to the United States than the current regime with its continued aspirations to achieve nuclear capability and destroy America.
In short, you don’t need to care about Israel to conclude that using a limited amount of U.S. military assets for a few days to eliminate Iran’s ability to become a nuclear power makes sense.
“Doing so greatly improves our security and our economy while reducing inflation risk, and increases American jobs at home and abroad. It also greatly reduces risks to our soldiers stationed in the Middle East and to our shipping resources operating in the region. Importantly, our intervention now can be achieved at low risk and limited cost, and executed in a matter of days once Israel is done setting the table.” Source