To: RetiredNow who wrote (218419 ) 2/9/2005 8:57:37 PM From: tejek Read Replies (1) | Respond to You see, this is how it would happen. A nuke goes off in New York or Los Angeles. We have a mountain of circumstantial evidence linking the detonation to a group of terrorists, whom we believe were funded by and received logistical support from Iran. However, there is no smoking gun. There never is in the intelligence business. Usually, conclusions are probabilistic based on the amount of evidence and the quality of the sources. But smoking guns only come along once in a hundred years. So based on that intelligence, Bush may decide we need to retaliate against Iran, but you would be against that. So if you had your way, we would do nothing, but maybe impose economic sanctions. Then the next thing we know another bomb goes off in another American city. Why? Because we let them get away with the first one. Nope. I don't like your world at all. I'd prefer to be aggressive and proactive as hell to ensure Iran never acquires a weapon. Then we may be wrong, but at least we can reduce the probability of a nuke strike on a U.S. to near zero. As a citizen of the U.S., I expect my President to protect my family and my fellow citizens as his first priority.
