|
|
« Previous Politics | Next Politics » |
|
World War III
ByObviously, as we've had several occasions to note, Bush's efforts to portray his Iran stance as in line with the IAEA are wrong and dishonest. What's more, while it would obviously be a horrible turn of events for Israel to be subject to an Iranian nuclear attack, the response would be an Israeli counterattack and the destruction of Iran -- no World War III. And, more to the point, since the response would be an Israeli counterattack and the destruction of Iran, there's not going to be an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel. The whole thing is ludicrous. But the Bush administration, by repeatedly talking as if the US and its allies have no ability to deter rogue states, is possibly opening the door to some kind of dangerous misunderstandings.
As Condoleezza Rice wrote before going insane "These regimes are living on borrowed time, so there need be no sense of panic about them. Rather, the first line of defense should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence -- if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration."





























Join the Discussion
After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus