General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCotton talks up benefits of striking Iran
By Steve Benen
The debate over U.S. policy towards Iran tends to follow a predictable trajectory. The Obama administration has told lawmakers that they have a choice: they can allow the international, diplomatic agreement to move forward, or they can push us closer to yet another military conflict in the Middle East.
For Republicans and their allies, this has been labeled a false choice. U.S. conservatives dont want a war, they insist, they just want a different diplomatic solution. What might that alternative policy look like? Republicans, at least for now, havent the foggiest idea.
But once in a while, prominent GOP officials slip up and acknowledge that the choice isnt quite as false as they like to pretend. Last week, for example, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) seemed quite enthusiastic about the prospect of a war with Iran. The Times of Israel has a related report today on Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) talking up the benefits of military strikes in Iran.
Speaking to the Israel Diplomatic Correspondents Association, Cotton who retired from the US Army with the rank of captain called for the US to make plain to the Iranians that it wouldnt hesitate to use force if it felt the need to do so. ( )
You can destroy facilities. I dont think any military expert in the United States or elsewhere would say the US military is not capable to setting Irans nuclear facilities back to day zero, Cotton said. Can we eliminate it forever? No, because any advanced industrialized country can develop nuclear weapons in four to seven years, from zero. But we can set them back to day zero.
There are two broad problems with this.
more
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/cotton-talks-benefits-striking-iran?cid=eml_mra_20150805
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Once again, it's a GOP-hosted war party with a few LieberDem guests who want a piece of the action.
angryvet
(181 posts)and also stupid. I don't think he paid attention to the classes on "threat" and the size of Iran's military and what nukes can do.
procon
(15,805 posts)He has given no thought to the spectacular costs or the international blowback that would deservedly smack us in the face after such a stupidly shortsighted action. Like other insecure, small minded, shallow little men, war is his feel-good narcotic, and let the consequences be damned so long as he can stroke his ego.