We wouldn't really . . . would we?
Are we attempting some sort of military hat trick? Is the country not deeply enough in debt?
We aren't really going to drop nuclear bombs on Iran, are we?
Okay, let's say for the sake of argument that somehow the government of the United States orders the attack. What better reason could Iran have for acquiring nuclear weapons? After all, the surest way to get someone to hit you is to hit him first. Only I don't think that Iran would take the time to develop nuclear weapons on its own. No, time would be of the essence, so an outright purchase is the more likely course of action.
Of course, if they are all a bunch of terrorists, as we are so convinced that they are, they don't need big expensive weapons. After all couple of strategically employed airplanes brought this country to a halt for several days.
Are we truly arrogant enough to have enough faith in national security to be sure that sort of attack can't be repeated?
The United States makes the most noise about preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and yet the United States is the country guilty of the most damaging use of weaponry in history. Just ask the Japanese.
On the bright side, after we commit such atrocities, the guilt kicks in, and we feel obligated to pour money into the country we have just worked so hard to destroy, in an effort to rebuild it in our own image and to our own advantage.
Just think. Iran could look forward to having the same democracy as Afghanistan and Iraq. Now why would the Iranians want to fend off such an offer with nuclear weapons when they could share the good fortune of their Middle Eastern brethern?
We aren't really going to drop nuclear bombs on Iran, are we?
Okay, let's say for the sake of argument that somehow the government of the United States orders the attack. What better reason could Iran have for acquiring nuclear weapons? After all, the surest way to get someone to hit you is to hit him first. Only I don't think that Iran would take the time to develop nuclear weapons on its own. No, time would be of the essence, so an outright purchase is the more likely course of action.
Of course, if they are all a bunch of terrorists, as we are so convinced that they are, they don't need big expensive weapons. After all couple of strategically employed airplanes brought this country to a halt for several days.
Are we truly arrogant enough to have enough faith in national security to be sure that sort of attack can't be repeated?
The United States makes the most noise about preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and yet the United States is the country guilty of the most damaging use of weaponry in history. Just ask the Japanese.
On the bright side, after we commit such atrocities, the guilt kicks in, and we feel obligated to pour money into the country we have just worked so hard to destroy, in an effort to rebuild it in our own image and to our own advantage.
Just think. Iran could look forward to having the same democracy as Afghanistan and Iraq. Now why would the Iranians want to fend off such an offer with nuclear weapons when they could share the good fortune of their Middle Eastern brethern?
posted by minervasowl | 10:45 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home