I think this is a very interesting exchange on Iran between CNN's Wolf Blitzer and Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh (D), a possible Presidential contender for 2008. First, the transcript (bolding added for emphasis), then a few comments by yours truly:
BLITZER: All right. The Iranians say, why can these other countries like India or Pakistan or Israel for that matter have nuclear weapons? They deny that they're building a nuclear weapon, but why this double standard against Iran? That's basically the thrust of their argument.BAYH: There's no double standard, Wolf. Iran is the foremost sponsor of terrorism in the world. Every country I visited -- Israel, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq -- the Iranians are a force for instability and death. And in Iraq, they're now causing the deaths of Americans.
They have called for the destruction of another member state, Israel, a clear violation of the U.S. charter. None of the other countries you mentioned have done that. The president, who you just showed on there, asked an audience of thousands of students in Tehran to imagine a world in which there was no United States of America.
Iran is a menace, Wolf. They have to be dealt with, through economic, political, and cultural steps. And I'll just say one final thing. I'm glad the president is finally speaking out about this. But for four long years they have ignored this problem. It's brought us to the position that we're in today. And it has undermined the national security interests of the United States.
BLITZER: We have to take a quick break but very briefly, is there a military option, realistically speaking, given the U.S. involvement in Iraq, the fact that U.S. troops may be stretched about as much as possible right now? Realistically, against Iran is there a credible U.S. military option?
BAYH: Yes, but we don't want to go there. There are sensitive nodes in their program that could be struck that would dramatically delay its development. But that should not be an option at this point.
We ought to use everything else possible to keep from getting to that juncture, Wolf, because denying this problem for four years has brought us to a dilemma. On the one hand, we don't want to use military force. On the other hand, a nuclear-armed Iran is not acceptable.
So, here's what I find so interesting about this exchange. A moderate Democrat - Sen. Evan Bayh - is explicitly saying that a nuclear Iran is unacceptable. And, although military force is not Bayh's preferred option to deal with the problem, he obviously believes the option is on the table. This is all true, and should almost go without saying, but frankly it is near heresy to the far left wing of the Democratic Party. And that's extremely unfortunate, because it hurts the Democratic Party's image and credibility with most Americans on national security matters. I, for one, believe that Democrats need to be strong Progressives, willing to fight for what they believe in, and willing to use force - if necessary after all other options have been exhausted - to defend our country and our allies. In this case, a nuclear Iran, led by a man who denies the Holocaust and dreams of a world without America or Israel, is an unacceptable menace. It's high time for the UN Security Council to take serious action, and I'm glad to see Democrats like Evan Bayh leading the way on this issue.