Nice read, but the author assumes that the general Iranian populace supports the insane rantings of Ahmadinejad. He assumes the Iranian desire for nuclear energy is ultimately all about weapons, and not fuel. Alarmism based on a stack of hypotheticals is a pretty sad excuse for advocating pre-emptive military strikes.
Another thing: I think a "policy of pre-emption" is not at issue here, but rather "what are the grounds for pre-emption?". In my opinion the world's powers (led by the US) need to work ahrder on a poilcy of nuclear disarmament. Who the fuck is any nuclear nation to tell another nation that "it's ok if we got nukes, but it's not ok if you do"?
If you put a gun to a man's head, his natural reaction is to figure out a way to kill you before you decide to pull the trigger. We're not talking about a policy of pre-emption, we're talking about a policy of escalation. If the US is to lash out at every Muslim nation we can target (shall we talk about the air strike in Pakistan this weekend?) then we'd be equally responsible for this author's vision of a third world war.
also -
http://makeashorterlink.com (be nice to those who aren't running at least 1280x1024)
Threaded Mode
