Op-Ed: First They Came for the Sunnis...
Pastor Martin-Niemöller, who was arrested by Hitler in 1937, stated:
“First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.”
In the end, 85,000,000 died in World War II.
Assad and Iran just mass-murdered 1,200 human beings, mostly women and little children, because they were Sunnis. U.S. President Barack Obama does absolutely positively nothing. The world does nothing. Today there are 120,000 dead Sunnis; in a year or two, there will likely be 500,000 dead Sunnis. If Israel doesn't stop Assad and Iran now, the next stop on Iran's genocide spree will be Israel.
What does Obama's total inaction in the face of clear Iranian chemical genocidal mass-murder really mean? Well, it's not just 1,200 Sunnis. In Syria, Iran has murdered 120,000 Sunnis, and Obama hasn't lifted a single finger. In the face of massive covert Iranian weapons air-trains to Assad, Obama hasn't even covertly sent many, if any, weapons to the Syrian rebels. The only conclusion is that Obama is somehow under Iranian control.
It doesn't matter whether Obama's obsequiousness to Iran is due to a "legitimate" policy analysis, such as Obama's desire for a "Nuclear Grand Bargain" with Iran, or due to another darker hold on a US president. The bottom line is if Obama walks like an Iranian shill, quacks like an Iranian shill, or passively watches Iranian genocide like an Iranian shill, he's an Iranian shill.
But let's look at the most "positive" reason for Obama slavishly kowtowing to the Iranians: Obama doesn't want to rock his coming "Nuclear Grand Bargain" with Iran. If Obama is willing to pay the price of allowing Iran to murder 120,000 Sunnis for an Iranian nuclear deal, can anyone imagine Obama's deal will disallow Iranian nukes? For, if Obama has appeased Iran with the appetizer of 120,000 dead Sunnis, Obama will clearly serve Iran the "Grand Bargain" entree of a full nuclear arsenal.
From a different angle, if Obama was taking a hard line “no nuke” stance with Iran in the nuclear talks, would he take such an appeasing “it’s ok to murder 120,000 people” stand with Assad, Iran’s proxy? Also, If Obama ignores the murder of 120,000 Sunnis to “make a deal” with Iran, before Iran even has the nuclear bomb, what price will Obama be willing to pay after Iran has a nuclear bomb? Obama wouldn't, and couldn't, stop Iran from murdering millions of Sunnis or Israelis.
U.S. Joint Chief Martin Dempsey quakes in his boots at the mere prospect of intervening in Syria now, when the Iran-proxy Assad doesn't have an Iranian nuclear umbrella. Just imagine Dempsey's stark raving horror at actually attacking Iran, or one of its proxies, when Iran is armed with a nuclear arsenal. In the Korean War, America was totally paralyzed from defeating North Korea due to China's nascent nuclear program. Obama's excuse for inaction will turn from "I want a Grand Nuclear Bargain" to "Iran has a nuclear arsenal."
If Obama is paralyzed from stopping Assad’s chemical mass-murder, due to Obama’s belief that he needs to clinch an Iranian nuclear deal, he will be even more paralyzed from stopping Iran’s nuclear program if Obama’s subservience to Iran is due to a darker reason.
Now, after Iran has murdered millions of Sunnis under Obama's nose, what will be Iran's next genocide? You've got it: Israel. If Obama and the world have quietly watched Iran mass-murder millions of Sunnis without the nuclear bomb, what is Obama or the world going to do if Iran murders Israel and its six million Jews when Iran has a nuclear bomb? Does the world today care more for Israel's six million Jews in Iran's 2015 Holocaust 2.0, than it did for Europe's six million Jews in Hitler's Holocaust 1.0? Does Obama or the world care more for six million dead Israelis than it does six million dead Sunni Muslims? I don't think so.
And after Obama leaves the US presidency, any future US president will have to deal with a nuclear Iran armed with what Bibi says will be hundreds of nuclear bombs. If the United States was paralyzed into inaction when Stalin conventionally murdered millions of people because the Soviet Union was a nuclear power, the US will passively watch when Iran conventionally murders millions of Israelis when Israel has created a Palestinian Arab State.
Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) works both ways. Even if MAD would work with a suicidal Iran, MAD is a double-edged sword that would work to stop both parties from acting, not just Iran. MAD stopped both the Soviet Union and the United States from using nuclear weapons. So, if Iran mass-murders Israel with chemical-warheaded Katyushas or 109mm shells, or even just thousands of PA-launched regular rockets into Tel Aviv, America will be just as constrained from retaliating against a nuclear-armed Iran as it was from retaliating against the nuclear-armed Soviet Union.
In short, what is an Iranian genocide against the Sunnis today will turn into an Iranian genocide against Israel tomorrow. If Iran had no compunction in murdering hundreds of thousands of fellow Muslims, it will take supreme religious delight in mass-murdering six million Jews that are defiling the Muslim Holy places, and occupying Muslim lands and people.
If Israel doesn't ally with and protect the Sunnis of today, there will be no one left to ally with against Iran tomorrow.
For more information, please visit www.marklangfan.com