Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I don't know, about the former. Or the latter, I suppose. I don't want to know about the latter.
I think if a US President, Bush or otherwise, is faced with the choice of an impending Second Holocaust or using nukes on Iran to prevent, the choice is hard, but one that history will dictate that he/she has the guts to make. Much like Truman did. The last Dem of any repute.
What would you advocate, letting Ahmadinejad wipe Israel off the map. while we petitioned the UN to intervene?
|
I am not advocating anything. I am just saying that going nuclear is not an option. We didn't go there in Korea when we were for all intents and purposes at war with China and for a while they were beating us quite badly. A limited nuclear campaign in Manchuria would have saved probably tens of thousands of American soldier’s lives (and turned the war around) but both Truman, Eisenhower, and the whole establishment (except for Macarthur) knew it wasn't an option.
It wasn't then, it isn't now.
I don't believe we will go nuclear to save Israel, but that doesn't mean Israel won't.
