Mothering Forum banner

1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,035 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So says Juan Cole, and I believe him. Bush's contrary policy (attack em if they don't have nukes, don't attack em if they do) has made acquiring nukes an attractive (if not urgent) deterrent option. Combine this with his policy of unilateralism, and his relentless pursuit of new nuclear technologies (bunker busting bombs/small nukes), and we've pretty much laid out what any interests hostile to the US will be doing for the next 10 or more years.<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">It seems to me very likely that Iran will get a nuclear weapon. Any ruling elite in the global south with bad relations with the US can look at the difference between how the Bush administration dealt with Saddam and how it has dealt with North Korea. The difference seems mainly to be that North Korea already had a couple of nukes, whereas Iraq was not anywhere close. So Khamenei would look at that and decide that his government needs a couple of nukes to avoid being overthrown by the US, especially since Bush telegraphed his intention to do just that. I don't see how it could be stopped militarily; the US is overstretched and in no position to attack and occupy Iran.</td>
</tr></table></div>
<a href="http://www.juancole.com/" target="_blank">http://www.juancole.com/</a>
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
19,789 Posts
I had a big arguement about this with FIL last weekend.<br><br>
He thinks that no one else should get nukes. I just have to say, "Why wouldn't they?" How safe do you think *they* feel with our crazy man's finger on the button?
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top