Question for those who think we should not interfere in other nations' business: Is Obama wrong to leak Israel secrets to Iran?
“‘We’re watching what Iran does closely,’ one of the US sources, an
intelligence officer engaged in assessing the ramifications of a
prospective Israeli attack confirmed,’” according to the article. “But
we’re now watching what Israel is doing in Azerbaijan. And we’re not
happy about it.’” And this is just the latest in a series of
high-profile stories – based, in most cases, on unnamed American sources
– warning about a possible strike.
According to the logic in the
last piece, if Israel attacked, then Iran – which essentially developed
its program in contravention of the Non-Proliferation Treaty it signed,
and despite international inspectors – may choose not to let those
inspectors back in and, as a result, have an easier time pursuing
Now, that is an interesting bit of logic: Don’t attack, because if
you do, Iran won’t let back in the inspectors who were so impotent in
the first place that Tehran is now on the cusp of nuclear capability.
this constant drumbeat of Israel-must-not-take-action articles is not
only in press reports. A report Wednesday by the Congressional Research
Service – the US Congress’s nonpartisan “think tank” – said Iran could
recover from a strike and rebuild its centrifuge workshops within six
months, meaning that such a strike would be futile. It is “unclear what
the ultimate effect of a strike would be on the likelihood of Iran
acquiring nuclear weapons,” the report read.
These reports and
stories are not being made up out of whole cloth. Rather, they are fed
by sources intent on sending a clear message: Do not attack.
I'm not one who is opposed to our doing war to better another nations' lives, but some are. So, is it just war you oppose, or is it ANY interference you object to. Because if Iran demolishes Israel based on Obama's "leaks" of Israel plans, I will blame Obama for Israel's demise. What think you?
See Votes by State
News & Politics