web analytics
April 18, 2014 / 18 Nisan, 5774
At a Glance
Blogs
Sponsored Post
Spa 1.2 Combining Modern Living in Traditional Jerusalem

A unique and prestigious residential project in now being built in Mekor Haim Street in Jerusalem.



Home » Blogs

What ‘War’ with Iran is Biden Talking About?

Ryan should have answered Raddatz's "what's worse" question like so: "You know what's worse, a nuclear Iran that starts a war, because that's the future we're looking at under Obama's leadership."

F100311GY05

Photo Credit: Gili Yaari / Flash 90

Share Button

Former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates recently warned that, “The results of an American or Israeli military strike on Iran could, in my view, prove catastrophic, haunting us for generations in that part of the world.” During Thursday’s Vice Presidential debate the statement was read to Vice President Joe Biden and Vice Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan  at the start of segment on Iran.

What exactly Gates meant by “catastrophic” I’m not sure (Muslim/Middle East resentment towards the U.S.? Lack of access to oil? Increase in global terrorism?), but during the debate, both Biden and debate moderator Martha Raddatz seemed to argue that it meant going to war with Iran.

Here’s Raddatz:

RADDATZ: Well, let me ask you what’s worse, war in the Middle East, another war in the Middle East, or a nuclear-armed Iran?

RYAN: I’ll tell you what’s worse. I’ll tell you what’s worse.

RADDATZ: Quickly.

RYAN: A nuclear-armed Iran which triggers a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. This is the world’s largest sponsor of — of terrorism. They’ve dedicated themselves…

And here’s Biden:

BIDEN: When Governor Romney’s asked about it, he said, “We gotta keep these sanctions.” When he said, “Well, you’re talking about doing more,” what are you -you’re going to go to war? Is that what you want to do?

But who said anything about “going to war” – a term that implies landing U.S. troops in Iran? What everyone – Netanyahu, Mitt Romney, and even the Obama administration – is talking about is a military strike, and making it clear to the Iranians that the U.S. is prepared to conduct such a strike.

Biden himself said during the debate “we feel quite confident we could deal a serious blow to the Iranians.” By “dealing a serious blow” in the singular, Biden surely means some kind of air strike, not putting boots on the ground for continuous warfare.

The question is how seriously do the Iranians take that possibility. Romney and Ryan are arguing that the Iranians don’t take it seriously at all because so many voices from the administration are playing down the need for an attack, while playing up the negative possible consequences of an attack (e.g., saying it would be “catastrophic,” eschewing talk of “war”)  and pressuring Israel not to attack.  The evidence, which Ryan pointed to during the debate, is the fact that Iranians have, for the past four years, continued and even sped up their nuclear program.

But Biden isn’t actually talking about Iran. With the talk “war,” Biden is implying that Republicans – as evidenced the wars initiated by President George W. Bush – are generally war mongers and only Democrats can be trusted with office of the “commander in chief.”

But “Bush’s Wars” were not solely Bush’s or the Republican Party’s. Democrats, including Biden (despite his insinuation otherwise), voted overwhelmingly in favor of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Those were wars made necessary by the failure of the U.S. to pay attention to threats abroad and nip them in the bud, just as Obama is failing to do with Iran.

And, if it is true that attacking Iran will definitely trigger a counter attack which will require a greater U.S. response, then that would indicate the irrationality of the Iranians: that as their economy crumbles they would be willing to engage the most powerful military known to history. If they would act so brazenly without nuclear weapons/nuclear weapons capability, imagine how much more likely war would be if they already had a weapon/capability.

Ryan should have answered Raddatz’s “what’s worse” question like so: “You know what’s worse, a nuclear Iran that starts a war, because that’s the future we’re looking at under Obama’s leadership.”

Share Button

About the Author: Daniel Tauber is a frequent contributor to various prominent publications, including the Jewish Press, Arutz Sheva, Americanthinker.com, the Jerusalem Post and Ha’aretz. Daniel is also an attorney admitted to practice law in Israel and New York and received his J.D. from Fordham University School of Law. You can follow him on facebook and twitter.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

Leave a comment (Select your commenting platform)

8 Responses to “What ‘War’ with Iran is Biden Talking About?”

  1. Anonymous says:

    There is zero evidence that Iran seeks nuclear weapons.

  2. Quint Gaber says:

    Mr. Tauber is unbelievably simple-minded. So, he thinks that Israel or the US will make a "surgical" strike on Iran and no war will result. Well, he has a surprise waiting for him.

    ALL Us bases and Navy ships in the Persian Gulf are sitting ducks to Iranian cruse missiles, submarines and hundreds of speed boats. Israel is not going to escape either. Demona will be hit first and Tel Aviv will be next. An Iranian official predicated that at least 10,000 Israelis will die at the start. Besides, is Israel ready for 60,000 Hezbollah rockets?

    All this stupid talk about attacking Iran is pure garbage. There is no justification for it. It is against the UN Charter and it is simply stupid. But, apparently, Israel cannot live without war. I have never heard of such a belligerent country in history.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Daniel Tauber writes:And, if it is true that attacking Iran will definitely trigger a counter attack which will require a greater U.S. response, then that would indicate the irrationality of the Iranians:
    So if Iran is attacked and responds, that would indicate they are irrational.
    Do you get paid to write this stuff? it must be a nice living.
    This article is a repeat of all the nonsense we heard in the build up to the Iraq War.

  4. Quint Gaber says:

    The comment management on this page is ridiculous. So, if they don't like your comment, they don't delete it. They just make it invisible to everyone else.

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Loading Facebook Comments ...
Loading Disqus Comments ...
UWI blog logo
Current Top Story
Flyers ordered Jews to appear at a designated location in Ukrane, in Sept., 1941. The next day, the Jews lined up at the Babi Yar Ravine.
‘Jews Must Register’ Flyer in Ukraine an Echo of Babi Yar
Latest Blogs Stories
Church of the Nativity, beseiged and desecrated by Arab Palestinian terrorists in the spring of 2002.

World Council of Churches expresses solidarity with “Palestinians” ‘languishing’ in Israeli prisons.

Haggadah for the Passover Seder.

The Seder: We starve (during the sometimes endless recitations and discussions) and we feast.

Unit 9900 is an intelligence unit that utilizes the unique capabilities of soldiers on the autism spectrum.

The unique skills of people on the autistic spectrum adds great breadth to IDF intelligence work.

Jews are no longer slaves, but many are still plagued with a slave mentality.

Passover is a road that we still travel, a long journey from slavery to freedom.

In Iran, 131 offenses are punishable by death, including blasphemy, adultery and homosexuality.

Women must eat Matzah on Pesach too but that is also a time bound positive commandment.

Pro-Israel leaders on campus are as important as the troops in the IDF and professional hasbaraniks.

The seder reminds us of our freedom now that we are home again in the land of the Nation of Israel

IDF helicopters are ready to act on a moment’s notice to defend the State of Israel.

The Samson Super Hercules aircraft ensures the IDF can safeguard Israel from far beyond her shores.

Rudoren and the Times are determined to go the extra mile to humanize Barghouti.

Gazans are among the principal victims of the terror-addicted Hamas Islamists.

Factors that you need to take into account when deciding whether to rent or buy a home.

Intelligence organizations seek enemy’s secrets; for the past 35 years, all secrets are on computers.

Guest Blogger Robert proves that one must not eat any Matzah on Pesach based on an article in Vosizneias.

More Articles from Daniel Tauber
JStreet crowd

Congratulations, JStreet, you won before you even started! Perhaps you can save your breath, energy and George Soros’ and god knows who else’s money and go home.

drunk UN

A US diplomat proposed that UN negotiating rooms be ‘inebriation-free zones.’

In the version of events provided by Argo, it wasn’t radical Islamists who stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran, but the Iranian people as a whole.

Not exactly what Jewish Home voters thought they would get on election day.

The institution of party primaries in Israel needs to be expanded not shrunk, so that the government will be under the supervision of the people from which it derives power and the moral authority to govern.

Ayalon’s new position on the Palestinian statehood doesn’t quite match his prior criticism of the Palestinian’s bid for statehood at the UN.

East Jerusalem has become code for: where Jews shouldn’t be.

Israeli willingness to do whatever it takes to prevent weapons of mass destruction from falling into the wrong hands may be the only thing preventing civil wars or heated rhetoric from becoming mass atrocities.

    Latest Poll

    Now that Kerry's "Peace Talks" are apparently over, are you...?







    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/what-war-with-iran-is-biden-talking-about/2012/10/14/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: