Wars and Rumors of Wars

President George Bush continued his threatening stance toward Iran today, warning that a nuclear Iran could provoke WWIII.

Let’s step back a moment. The US is the only nation that has used a nuclear weapon–and we did so twice, against civilians, to make a dramatic statement. The US, not Iran, is at present engaged in an aggressive war and threatening another.

So which nation is posing a greater threat to world peace? Iran, for seeking what the US, Russia, Great Britain, France, China, North Korea, India, Pakistan, and Israel have? It seems Iran has nuclear powers on three sides. Is their interest unreasonable?

And don’t those nuclear neighbors have more reason to be concerned than the United States–particularly Russia, which might be concerned that Iran might provide nuclear weapons to Chechnya? Yet Russia is the main nation urging caution and moderation in speech and action.

Time for the president to take a vacation, I think.

3 thoughts on “Wars and Rumors of Wars

  1. Are you seriously putting the Holocaust denying-, “wipe Israel off the map” Iranian regime in the same category as British, US, French, Chinese, & Russian governments?

  2. Is it a legitimate government, recognized by its people?

    And how did this government get in place? Because of a popular revolt against a dictator whose brutal regime had been propped up by the United States.

    And yes, I would put Russia and China in the same category as Iran. They remain brutal regimes which violate human rights–with far worse histories than the current regime in Iran. Does that mean we threaten to nuke them?

  3. I think there is a major difference between Iran and Russia (or the former USSR) or China. Although both Russia & China violate human rights, they act rationally in a mode of self preservation. The current Iranian believes it will usher the arrival of the 12th Imam by obliterating Israel and the West.

    I feel much more secure with China and Russia (or the current Pakistan) having nuclear weapons than Iran. No, we should not threaten to nuke them. But we should use every non-violent means of stopping their development. If that fails, we should support a limited, non-nuclear strike to cripple their nuclear capabilities. To be consistent, I think we should have done the same thing with Iraq if we really thought they were developing nuclear weapons rather than invade them.

Comments are closed.