|
Bloglines user SeanMcBride ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) has sent this item to you, with the following personal
message:
Break out the champagne: Thomas Friedman is NOT an Iran War ringleader. Neither is Christopher Hitchens, last I checked. Nor Robert Kagan. Nor even Alan Dershowitz, I believe. The neocons and neolibs were so badly burned by the Iraq War that they are beginning to back off on some of their more ambitious schemes, probably in part from a desire not to suffer a public hanging.
|
|
|
Amazing to read this in the New York Times--sanity, at last, and from Tom Friedman of all people. He says that having a nuclear armed Iran is better than having W. and Rummy launch attacks. In his own words:
If these are our only choices, which would you rather have: a nuclear-armed Iran or an attack on Iran's nuclear sites that is carried out and sold to the world by the Bush national security team, with Don Rumsfeld at the Pentagon's helm?
I'd rather live with a nuclear Iran.
While I know the right thing is to keep all our options open, I have zero confidence in this administration's ability to manage a complex military strike against Iran, let alone the military and diplomatic aftershocks. As someone who believed — and still believes — in the importance of getting Iraq right, the level of incompetence that the Bush team has displayed in Iraq, and its refusal to acknowledge any mistakes or remove those who made them, make it impossible to support this administration in any offensive military action against Iran.
|
|
|
|
|
Search the archives for political-research at http://www.terazen.com/
Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/rss
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
