Letters to the Editor
-
Rational Responses
I wouldn't use "history of invasions" as a metric to measure responsibility. Here's one in Israel's favor; they have honored peace treaties with Egypt. They have a proven track record of settling differences with former enemies.
Israel has violated 28 resolutions of the United Nations Security Council (which are legally binding on member-nations).
http://www.geocities.com/savepalestinenow/internationallaw/studyguides/sgil3.htm
are we better off stopping iran from obtaining nukes? and how far are we willing to go (what price will we pay)?
Who bestowed the responsibility on the U.S. (and Israel) to police this?
Iran. . . . obliterating itself? you mean like the suicide bombers who board the buses in Israel?
Here is where you ignore history. Mutually assured destruction kept the world's two most significant nuclear powers in check for the entire cold war. Your statement above "garners an emotional response, rather than a rational one." to quote you back at yourself.
You have to ignore a lot of history to draw that conclusion.
The lesson that Iran has learned is that of North Korea, who has nukes, and has not been attacked by the U.S.
I do not support Iran, or anyone's pursuit of nuclear weapons. I think there are more than enough in the world today. But to treat Iran as if they are irrational, as you and the neocons have been doing, hasn't been working out so well.