UAE AMBASSADOR SPEAKS THE TRUTH

Just last week, I stressed the importance of dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions and the threat they pose not only to Israel and Europe, but to the Arab countries as well.


The Wall Street Journal ran an editorial on July 9, 2010, which expounds on that theory specifically detailing the concerns of Yousef Al-Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Ambassador to the United States.

According to Ambassador Al-Otaiba, the UAE and other Arab countries fear a nuclear Iran as much and perhaps more than Israel does. When asked if the Ambassador wanted the United States to intervene in Iran’s bomb program, he answered, “Absolutely.” He then went on to highlight a point that is not often addressed or mentioned by the pundits, and that was the immediate threat to the United States of a nuclear Iran, which in turn would have an enormous impact on the security of our Arab allies. That threat isn’t a threat against us here at home, but more so, a threat to military assets buried within the Arab region.

The Ambassador’s concerns for our assets obviously has a self-serving interest, that being that a multiple attack on the U.S. installations in the region would clearly diminish our ability to defend and support our allies like Dubai, Israel, the UAE, Jordan, etc. If that happened, many countries in the region would reluctantly cower and run for cover toward Iran if they lacked the assurance that the United States was willing or able to confront Iran.

The Ambassador and I concur that a nuclear Iran will never be deterred by sanctions, and that the U.S. or Israel needs to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities. We further agree that THE TIME TO DEAL WITH IRAN IS NOW.

Now is the time to deal with Iran

On Sunday, June 27, 2010, CIA Director, Leon Panetta, appeared on ABC's News Show "This Week". The head of the Central Intelligence Agency made it perfectly clear that Iran has to be dealt with once and for all.


Mr. Panetta discredited the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate that claimed Iran had stopped working on its nuclear weapons back in 2003, and he believes that they are close to acquiring multiple bombs. He further indicated that for Iran to make their systems viable, it may take up to two years, but they are moving ahead aggressively during this time and are continuing to develop missiles and warheads.

Panetta said he thought the recent United Nations Security Council sanctions "will have some impact" on deterring Iran's program. I strongly disagree. The sanctions are weak and both Iran and the international community know they are weak as well. Just to keep things in perspective, when have the United Nations Security Council sanctions ever made an impact (Iraq, N. Korea, etc.)?

I believe the current administration naively made a diplomatic attempt to deal with Tehran, and in doing so was ignored by Iran's leadership who has continually threatened Israel and any European nation that supports it.

The President of Iran, Mahmoud Admedinejad, is a sick demented terrorist that will not be deterred by the United Nations, the United States, nor the European sanction. He has ignored us at every juncture, focusing on creating Iran's nuclear capability and making Israel his prime target.

This is not Iraq or Afghanistan, nor is it questionable intelligence. This "clone of Adolph Hitler" has stood up in front of the entire world and proudly boasted that given nuclear capability, he intends to blow Israel off the face of the earth. The United States of America is one of Israel's greatest allies, and yet we are doing nothing to help them.

Israel needs our help - POST HASTE! So does Jordan, Iraq, the UAE, Europe, and any other country that may fall prey to Iran and its president. Sanctions will only work when the United Nations Security Council gets to work, gets serious, and grows a backbone!

IRAN MUST BE STOPPED AND STOPPED NOW! If the United Nations cannot or will not do it, the United States of America must step in and give Israel the support they need. Not just for the sake of Israel, but for something I pray for daily, WORLD PEACE.

Written BY BERNARD B. KERIK:

Petraeus Needs a Winning Strategy, Resources

The debate over whether General Stanley McChrystal should have been relieved of his command over the comment revealed in a recent Rolling Stone Magazine by him or his aides will go on forever - however, there should be no debate that General David Petraeus is the right man to replace him. Patraeus' record speaks for itself and his military genius was demonstrated in northern Iraq in 2003 and then again in his strategy and success with the surge in Iraq in 2007. Petraeus' new command will come with terrain and operational challenges quite different from Iraq, however none of which he should not be able to overcome given the right resources to do the job. This is where he could run into a problem as his success strongly depends on his support by the President and this administration. Incompetent commanders, a lack of resources, untrained troops and a failed strategy, either combined or separate and apart, could result in a failure in battle. That being said, the President has now placed our best war fighter in command with what I believe is the best trained military in the world today. Now it's only a matter of strategy and resources. Last December the President said that, "after 18 months, our troops will begin to come home," when discussing the Afghan initiative. Petraeus, as politely as he could, disagreed with the Commander-in-Chief, saying that counterinsurgency is a "roller coaster experience," and does not lend itself to a strict timeline. Petraeus knows that the terrorists and Taliban will sit and wait us out and a timeline would embolden our enemies to change their overall strategies and sit tight until we're long gone. When Generals McChrystal and Petraeus put the Afghan initiative together, McChrystal asked for 40,000 additional combat troops to support his operation. The President on the advice of others on Capital Hill refused McChrystal's request and gave him far less than what he asked for. Why? Who knows better than the commanders on the ground as to what is needed for the mission? If the President has a real desire to win the Afghan offensive, he needs to allow General Petraeus to design the strategy and he must give him whatever he says he needs to carry out the mission. If the President refuses to do so, it will be his loss, but moreover a greater loss for the security of this country... one that we cannot afford. We have a proven winner in General Petraeus and we have the best troops money can buy. Now let's create a strategy that will win and give Petraeus what he needs to get it done. We must support Petraeus 100 % or we will be jeopardizing the lives of our brave men and women in harms way and that just cannot be.