You can purchase an autographed copy of Anything But Straight by sending a $35 check or money order to:
-------------------------
Wayne Besen
PO Box 25491
Brooklyn, NY 11202
Just hours ahead of an emergency meeting of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, a U.S. official says a "troubling" briefing in Vienna has revealed new information that Iran might be pursuing atomic weapons.
I don't know about you, but I've about run out of patience with Iran. Under no circumstances can this dangerous nation possess nuclear weapons. I hope war can be avoided, but if the choice is between allowing the radical Islamist nation to have WMD or war - I vote for war.
This, of course, would be a terrible option. Not only would innocent people die, but the people of Iran also want to live in a free, normal country. However, the recent hard line of the nation's maniacal rulers inch us ever closer to a military showdown.
9 Comments:
I agree, it's like giving a loaded gun to crazy street thug. The US and Israel should surgically remove all of the uranium enrichment sites. After iran's comments, it would certainly be justified. We didnt suffer the ussr's nuke's in cuba!
posted by Anonymous, at
2/02/2006 7:56 AM
Wayne Besen for president!
(Respectfully said, how would you, as president, go about doing this? Iran is a substantially bigger, much more mountainous nation than Iraq...and has hated us well before the governorship of Texas was even a gleam in GWB's eyes...)
posted by Anonymous, at
2/02/2006 10:43 AM
Nuclear weapons in Iranian hands is unthinkable. Their leader is purported to be one of the ringleaders in the takoever of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran during the late 70s. I'm not so sure about military intervention. We've botched Iraq and as the previous commentator said, Iran is a much bigger country and far more difficult to conduct maneuvers. It would be a blood bath for sure.
This is the kind of fearmongering the Republicans excel at! Iran is nowhere near nuclear weaponry and we have rejected any direct negotiations with them even when they have made overtures! We have at leat 6 to 10 years before they would be anywhere near nuclear capability. Let's explore how we can work with them in that timeframe. Military options should be a last resort. Invading Iran would make Iraq look like a cakewalk.
posted by Anonymous, at
2/02/2006 12:05 PM
-- Couldn't agree more on this one. Iran must never be allowed to have nukes. (and its not like me to be hawkish)
With the rhetoric coming out of Iran these days ... the prospects look bleak.
You know its some serious shit when France is threatening the use of nukes as a deterent ... add China and Russia into the mix and we have the makings of either another Cold War Stalemate scenario or WWIII on our hands.
OK, boys...seriously...as president what would you do differently in Iran than GWB has in Iraq?
(And lest we forget, the U.N., Bill Clinton, and a bunch of other people besides our current prez said that Iraq had WMDs prior to our going in there...)
posted by Anonymous, at
2/02/2006 1:39 PM
-- Anon:
To answer your question ... what would I do differently than HRH King George?
Well, for starters I would align our NATO allies and get broad worldwide support and assistance in any war and policing effort to curtail Iran's nuclear capabilities ... and not expect American's to be the only real force put in harms way *or* to foot the bills.
I would also seek to exhaust *all* efforts at diplomacy before engaging in bloodshed and most importantly I would seek to get as much on the ground intel - *based in reality* as possible before making any rash decisions.
