In my last post I questioned whether President Bush’s language towards Iran was strong enough. At The Corner, Michael Ledeen thinks those words were simply code for “Iran, we are going to bomb your ass into next week.”:
Did We Just Declare War on Iran and Syria?
Try parsing this carefully:
“Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity – and stabilizing the region in the face of the extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.”
I’ve read that last sentence maybe ten times. Those “networks providing advanced weaponry and training” certainly are based in Iran and Syria. It sounds like he said we are going after terrorist training camps and the IED assembly facilities, doesn’t it?
Possibly, and really, I hope so. Its what has to happen, unfortunately. However, I still think the enemy is strengthened by lack of rhetoric from our side.
Hugh Hewitt agrees with Ledeen, and thinks it was a way to say it without making the dems mad, but still *wink wink* at the rest of us:
Crucially Iran heard a hint of measures beyond the borders of Iran, though in the sort of terms that none can object to. When the president spoke of destroying the networks aiding the terrorists, he meant the Quds Brigades and the other Iranian agents at work in Iraq, and the placement of the paragraph cannot be misunderstood.
And yet, they still objected, didn’t they?
This post is sponsored by Stag Weekend – Bristol