if you were in charge

http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=284682

http://www.debka.com/article/22350/Obama-and-Netanyahu-shadowbox-on-Iran-ahead-of-final-round-Sept-28

“It’s roughly about a year right now. A little more than a year. And so … we think we will have the opportunity once we know that they’ve made that decision, take the action necessary to stop (Iran),” Panetta said on CBS’s “This Morning” program.”

2 cents:

If you were the leader of a country or even a group of people who has:

1. heard repeatedly over the last eight years from another country near your location that they desire to see you wiped off the face of the earth
2. knew that said country spent millions of dollars if not billions to arm and train terrorists to wreak havoc against your nation
3. knew that they have a religious practice which advocates lying to get to your ultimate objective
4. said country then begins a nuclear program which they do their best to be secretive while stating it is for civil/non-military application

Would you – the leader of the country put your people’s lives in the hands of someone else who can and does respond to the known 4 points with a comment that is steeped in “if” vocabulary?

Another way to think about it – using the same and FACTUAL points – as a career which is based on political philosophy and perception of leadership would you place your career’s future in the hands of such “wavering” precepts? As a political being wouldn’t you own your career and try to get in front of these scary realities so as to not lose points on perceived leadership abilities and strategic thinking misfires?

Lets look at it another way. If you were the president of the USA and your nation had just been attacked – lets say in at least four different ways – actually four terrorist attacks – would you try remedy the disagreement and loss of life with going to the UN and asking for them to open diplomatic channels with the terrorists so that we can agree to disagree but stop loss of life? It is 9/11 today and is that what the CES would have done in response to the attacks if he had been president instead of Bush? What kind of leadership would that have been perceived as?

Netanyahu has the reality of a 9/11 on a scale that could in one fell swoop eliminate the nation of his people. Just because Ahmadinejad is a leader of a nation does it make him less dangerous the a Bin-Laden was just a few years ago?  After all Ahmadinejad has a large armed military force plus a couple large terrorist organizations in his control.

Does the CES disagree with the way Bush handles the terrorist leader? If so – then why did he order the take down of him via military action without Pakistani sovereign support? Why is he using drones to kill terrorists abroad?

Remember CES = chief empty suit = current US president