First, I thank God for the foot soldiers of our intelligence and undercover agencies. They risk life and limb just for the privilege of serving others and expect nothing in return. THANK YOU.

After listening to the reports that a brazen plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States was foiled, I let out a long sigh if relief. Just as suddenly, that sigh was sucked back into my chest after gasping at our response to what can only be described as a wanton act of war against the United States of America.

We know that this plot was “directed and approved by elements of the Iranian government”. We know that it involved active elements of the Iranian Quds Force which is a part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. They answer only to the highest part of the Iranian chain of command. We know these agents were attempting to set up a murder for hire with members of Mexican drug cartels with the promise of “unlimited supplies” of opium at their disposal for processing.

To ignore or pretend that the highest elements of the Iranian government were not involves in this act of war is to purposely want to stick your head in Iranian desert sand. They do not “freelance” as Monica Crowley stated tonight on The O’Reilly Factor, meaning that they are all in it together especially when it comes to harming the “Great Satan”. Yet the the response by the Obama Administration is so tepid, it borders on wimpish. Attorney General holders claim that the “United States is committed to holding Iran accountable for it’s actions” was laughable if the situation were not so serious. Couple that with Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s insomniatic response and you can conclude the Iranians will get off with yet another slap on the wrist:

“This really, in the minds of many diplomats and government officials, crosses a line that Iran needs to be held to account for,” Clinton adds: “We are actively engaged in a very concerted diplomatic outreach to many capitals, to the U.N. in New York, to not only to explain what happened so we can try to pre-empt any efforts by Iran to be successful in what would be their denial and their efforts to try to deflect responsibility but so that we also enlist more countries in working together against what is becoming a clearer and clearer threat…We want to reassure our friends that the complaints against Iran are well-founded.” That kind of response makes Jimmy Carter look like one of the Sons of Anarchy .

Yet the permutations of this plot are cryptic if not devastating in its long term analysis. Charles Krauthammer’s analysis (on Special Report’s All Star Panel) highlighted the clear and present danger the Iranian regime poses and the risk involved in continually soft-pedalling their aggression:

“There is another aspect of this that I am not sure people have looked at. If you wanted to kill the Saudi Ambassador, you could kill him in London. You could do it anywhere. Why would you do it here..? I think what the objective here is – and again - I think this is a high risk brazen operation is to show the United States that Iran has the capacity to operate in the Unites States secretly…and detonate a weapon.” This analysis in and of itself should chill you to the core. However, Mr. Krauthammer’s insight went much deeper. “Iran is working on a nuclear weapon. It doesn’t have intercontinental (missiles), so it cannot reach the United States yet. But this would be a demonstration that on the day we acquire a nuke, you the United States, are deterred. You the United States will always have to worry you wake up in the morning and there will be a bomb in your capital. A nuke we got in because we demonstrated our capacity of doing this and we could set it off.”

If Mr. Krauthammer’s analysis isn’t a perfect redaction of the technique of terror the Iranians dream of foisting upon us, I don’t know what would make a better and more definitive example. It is yet another compelling reason as to why we MUST secure our borders. Be warned: if we continue to take the Obama road to kissy, kissy apologetic triangulating diplomacy in the hopes they will like us (and thus refrain from wanting to kill us) we are placing the future of millions at risk for the sake of political correctness. This is disgraceful.

Remember how the Iranians would stick their finger in our eye at will during the Carter Administration when they held American hostages for 444 days? Do you remember how the Iranians let them go because President Reagan let it be known to them we would pound the living hell out of them when he came into power if the hostages were not released? This is the only language that will stop them in their tracks and deter their naked agression. Harsh sanctions (please), condemnation of the international community (yawn) and resolutions from the United Nations (ha!) will not punish them a dot and all it will do is embolden them (as they have been for this plot) to bigger and badder things that can eventually lead them to a successful strike. We have to be on time and on target every time, they on the other hand need only be right once.

If on the other hand, we took out let’s say their only refinery for gasoline, that would really hurt them where it counts and let them know we are deadly serious when it comes to open acts of aggression on our soil. That would send a clear and unmistakable signal. After listening to Holder and Clinton, I fear that “holding them accountable” will be no more bothersome to the Iranians than something stuck on the bottom of their shoe.

Marcos Sendon is the Editor of SflaConservative.com