Senator Jim Inhofe asked Chuck Hagel why the Iranians had endorsed his nomination for secretary of defense:
"Given that Iran, the people — I’m quoting right now from Iran — people of the Middle East, the Muslim region and North Africa, people of these regions hate America from the bottom of their heart," said Inhofe. "It further said Israel is a cancerous tumor in the heart of the Islamic world. They further said Iran’s warriors are ready and willing to wipe Israel off the map. The question I’d like to ask you, and you can answer for the record if you’d like, why do you think the Iranian foreign ministry so strongly supports your nomination to be the Secretary of Defense?"
Hagel responded, "I have a difficult enough time with American politics, Senator. I have no idea, but thank you. And I’ll be glad to respond further for the record."
Watching foreign diplomats run circles around America’s striped pants set is always a depressing spectacle. In recent days we’ve been treated to some doozies—for instance, Iran being elected to the U.N.’s Commission on the Status of Women when our own (female) U.N. ambassador didn’t show up for the vote.
A newly released Department of Defense report on the Iranian military threat is getting a lot of attention because it says Iran may have ballistic missiles capable of striking the U.S. by 2015. It is understandable that this part of the assessment has gotten so much notice. It clearly contradicts what the Obama administration was saying just several months ago. But there is more to the report, which was submitted to Congress as required by the National Defense Authorization Act and details the “current and future military strategy of Iran.”
Namely, the DoD has confirmed, once again, that the Iranians are in the business of waging a proxy war against America and her allies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Simply put, the Iranians are in the business of killing Americans.
Remember the two missiles defense sites—one in Poland, the other in the Czech Republic—that the Obama administration cancelled last fall as a goodwill gesture to Russia? The stated rationale at the time was: Since the sites were intended to defend America and our allies from Iranian missiles, and our intelligence estimated that the Iranians were a long way from fielding such missiles, the sites were unnecessary.
Now, this was a transparently flimsy excuse even at the time. If we believed (which we did then and do now) that Iran is determined to develop ICBMs, then why wait? It takes time to build interceptor and radar sites and make sure they work properly. Is the right time to begin only after the threatening country has in hand the capability which the installations are intended to counter?