Posted by: Matt
Comment: #1
Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:42 PM
Frankly, I HOPE you are right - though every Bushie that's been asked about this has stated that while "all options are on the table," there is no pending war with Iran. However, I am one of those "neocons" who believes that Iran needs to be stopped. Not only because it is responsible (as you yourself quote) for the deaths of US servicemen in Iraq...but also because it is about to go nuclear, and once that happens, it will be too late. It will be impossible to threaten Iran militarily if it does not cease providing weapons to Hezbollah and Syria for use against Israel, it will be impossible to credibly demand that Iran stop doing what it is doing in places like Basra. We will be right back to where we were in dealing with the Soviets; and where we are now with China and North Korea - confined to the realm of diplomacy and economic punishment inflicted primarily through the UN. There's nothing wrong with using those tools (instead of relying only on military force) to effect change in other countries, but the US position is strongest if it has all three options within its reach. There is no reason to think the first two will be able to prevent further Iranian mischief - the Europeans have been going around and around for for years trying to get Tehran to cease uranium enrichment - and we can't get anything done at the UN because of Russian and Chinese vetoes. So stopping Iran militarily before it is too late, is of paramount importance. If Bush does not act, I sincerely hope McCain will.
|
