According to Barack Obama, Iran is just a “tiny country” that doesn’t “pose a serious threat to us..” Question, Sen. Obama: should Iran be allowed to go nuclear?
If your answer is yes, perhaps you could explain how such a development is either “inconsequential” or serves the best interests of the United States. That is perhaps you could explain it if someone in the MSM had the “temerity” to ask such a straightforward question. It is easy to talk about diplomacy or negotiation “without preconditions” in the abstract. And certainly a nuclear Iran would constitute “change,” the buzzword of your presidential campaign.
Doubtless there are many liberals who believe that a nuclear Iran can be “contained,” much like the Soviets during the Cold War. Perhaps you are one of them, despite the fact that the radical Islam preached by the Iranian mullahs calls for the return of the Twelfth or Hidden Imam, whose re-emergence requires a “period of chaos” before it occurs–and that the same mullahs are on the record as saying they don’t care if Iran is annihilated, as long as Islam survives. Does such a suicidal rejection of MAD–mutually assured destruction–which deterred the Soviets and the Chinese, have any influence on your reasoning?
If your answer is no, to what lengths are you willing to go to stop them? It is apparent to some Americans that sanctions, the diplomatic efforts of France, England and Germany, and the desire to promote internal regime change have proved largely ineffective–even as Iran has increased the number of operating centrifuges from 3000 to 6000 in the past year. Since you’ve insisted there is a concrete time horizon for removing American troops from Iraq, regardless of conditions on the ground, do you have one regarding Iran’s continuing defiance of international law? Is there ANY circumstance in which you would green-light the use of military force?
In terms of geography, Italy, Germany and Japan are “tiny countries.” Yet these tiny countries managed involve America in a war where we lost 414,000 lives. Apparently, size doesn’t matter.
So far you’ve gotten by on generalities, Senator. Sooner or later some specifics will be required.
On the subject of mainstream media “even-handedness,” a quickie: last week Barack Obama claimed–after a thoughtful pause, no less –he had visited “57 states” during his presidential campaign. Compare the muted media coverage of that boneheaded statement to the media’s relentlessness following former Republican vice president Dan Quayle’s spelling of “potatoe.”
Any questions?
atahlert@comcast.net
Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here
