Will U.N. and Democrats Ignore WMDs in Iran?

What should be done about weapons of mass destruction in Iran? Members of the U.N. and the Democrats repeatedly attacked President Bush for his somehow believing that poison gas bombs, chemical weapons, and a nuclear program of Hussein in Iraq didn't count as WMDs, that Husseins' uncooperation did not matter, and that no action against Hussein was justified. What does count as WMDs and what could cause enough concern in Iran to justify action there?

Next are a progression of articles about Iran's nuclear program, ending with serious information reported today. (In them, emphasis is added.) If Bush isn't capable of handling Iran's WMDs, as the Democrats claimed about his handling of Iraq's, what will the Democrats do about Iran's nuclear program? Will they act in time? This could be more suspenseful than using your secret decoder pin for Orphan Annie's secret messages. Stay tuned, but don't have high expectations.

.

A speech over two years ago by John Bolton, who was not yet our U.N. ambassador at the time and who will cease to be that soon because of the Democrats, gave the U.S. perspective on Iran's nuclear program in this speech:

All of Iran’s WMD [weapons of mass destruction] efforts -- chemical weapons, biological weapons, nuclear weapons, and ballistic missiles -- pose grave threats to international security. ...If we permit Iran’s deception to go on much longer, it will be too late. Iran will have nuclear weapons. ...Much of the pressure on Iran has come not by the international community threatening the use of force against Iran, but merely by the prospect of Iran’s nuclear program to be placed on the agenda of the Security Council. Never has the Council been so feared! This is quite an achievement for an Administration frequently criticized as "unilateralist." Clearly, the time to report this issue to the Security Council is long overdue. To fail to do so would risk sending a signal to would-be proliferators that there are not serious consequences for pursuing secret nuclear weapons programs.

Iran on Monday froze its sensitive nuclear work including uranium enrichment, the United Nations atomic watchdog IAEA said in Vienna. Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), confirmed the suspension, a move likely to spoil US efforts to refer to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions against the Islamic republic.

Then, earlier this year came further "good news":

Iran's foreign minister said Tuesday his nation opposed atomic weapons, and the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency had not found any proof it was trying to manufacture them. ...The IAEA decided Feb. 4 to report Tehran to the (Security Council) over concerns it might be seeking nuclear arms. But further action was deferred until the end of next week's meeting at the insistence of veto-wielding council members Russia and China, which have close economic and political ties with Iran....

And, just this past September, came these "facts" about U.S. lies on Iran:

Four years ago, President George Bush appeared before the UN General Assembly and demanded that the UN rubberstamp a war against Iraq that was based on flagrant lies about Saddam Hussein’s so-called weapons of mass destruction. Today, as Bush goes to the UN to demand tough action against Iran, American claims that Tehran has a nuclear weapons program have been exposed as fabrications. The UN’s nuclear supervisory body—the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—last week issued a stinging rebuttal of the “erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated information” contained in a US congressional report....

At the same time, we are warned of Republican's shocking intentions on Iran:

...there is only one logical reason to explain the current diplomatic push by the U.S. to haul Iran before the SC even without any consensus within the IAEA. Because when Iran's case comes before the SC and no sanctions are passed due to Russia's and China's vetoes, the U.S. will be left with no diplomatic options – not a desirable position to be in, unless the purpose all along was to resort to a military option. ...Since a ground invasion of Iran is impractical, the only possible military action is an aerial attack on Iran's nuclear installations, as Israel did to Iraq in 1981 (when Iraq was by all estimates several years away from the ability to build a nuclear bomb). However, unlike Iraq's Osirak reactor, Iranian nuclear facilities are underground and will require nuclear bombs to be destroyed. ...Is the U.S. willing to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear adversary that is an NPT signatory, thus risking universal condemnation? Several statements and documents from the Defense Department suggest that it is indeed fully prepared to do so.

Then, how do we get to this?:

International Atomic Energy Agency experts have found unexplained plutonium and highly enriched uranium traces in a nuclear waste facility in Iran and have asked Tehran for details, a report from the U.N. watchdog said Tuesday. The report, prepared for next week’s meeting of the 35-nation IAEA, also faulted Tehran for not cooperating with the agency’s attempts to investigate suspicious aspects of Iran’s nuclear program that have led to fears it might be interested in developing nuclear arms. ...The report said it could not confirm Iranian claims that its nuclear activities were exclusively nonmilitary unless Tehran increased its openness. ...As expected, the four-page report...confirmed that Iran continues uranium enrichment experiments in defiance of the U.N. Security Council. ...Both highly enriched uranium and plutonium can be used to make the fissile core of nuclear warheads.... ...But Tehran has shrugged off both Security Council demands that it stop developing its enrichment programs.... A senior U.N. official who was familiar with the report cautioned against reading too much into the new finds of traces of highly enriched uranium and plutonium.... ...Still, a series of IAEA reports across nearly four years have revealed a number of suspicious activities, including unexplained plutonium experiments, possession by Iran of diagrams showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of nuclear warheads and other traces of highly enriched uranium at sites linked to military research. As such the newest findings were likely to be cited by the United States and other nations suspicious of Tehran’s nuclear agenda as adding to circumstantial evidence against it.

Dear Democrats, may we have your secret plan to deal with Iran and its WMDs, since you have told us that you, and not President Bush, know how to handle these things? May we have it now, even though the election is over, before it's too late? Otherwise, don't come back later saying that you could have done better.