Using his strongest language on the subject to date, Gates told a group of Marine Corps students that a strike would probably delay Tehran's nuclear program from one to three years. A strike, however, would unify Iran, "cement their determination to have a nuclear program, and also build into the whole country an undying hatred of whoever hits them," he said.
There are five things wrong within this single paragraph.
One, Iran has been working on their nuclear weapons program for 25 years. That speaks of some existing determination.
Two, Israel is supposed to be worried about Iranians developing an undying hatred of them? That ship sailed long ago, as the saying goes.
Three, even if your average Iranian is filled with the love of Israel, if Iran's nutso mullah rulers nuke Israel notwithstanding the love of the Iranian people for Jews, is it really supposed to be a consolation that the Iranian people feel really, really bad about that whole nuked city incident? I'd rather have the hatred of a nuclear-free Iran than the love of the Iranian people whose mullahs have nuclear weapons. I assume the Israelis would agree on that score.
Four, who says a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities would unite Iranians rather than make them blame the mullahs for bringing this destruction down on them? Georgian opposition groups manage to protest their government despite the fact that 8 short months ago Russia invaded them. Our Left seems to have gotten over the whole 9/11 thing nicely.
And five, if the alternative is Iran with nuclear weapons, I'd rather buy those 1-3 years. I assume the Israelis would rather have that time. Who knows what might happen in that time? Who knows what the rest of the world might do to further delay or stop the Iranians?
Five problems in logic in one short paragraph. I won't judge if those were Gates' strongest words to date on the subject.
