Fox News ping to Today show ping list.
Well if Marvin Kalb says so, it must be true.
Who cares what a talking head says! Maybe we can send Kalb over there to get the real skinny then admit he is a spy.
In an effort to be "fair and balanced", Fox continues to interview the likes of this clown.
Iraq didn't have as many nuke sites like Iran has
I'm not saying it's not possible to bomb the sites .. but it's won't be easy either
Oh man... if I'm not mistaken this guy Marvin Kalb used to have a show on CNN as well. This guy was definitely a liberal used to take pot shots at Republicans consistantly.
Tactical nukes will work. The radiation will make it impossible to go near the sites.
Exactly, When Kalb made that absurd statement this morning, the liberal bum was not even challenged.
FOX rolled shamefully on this piece of liberal flotsam.
****
Old Marvin needs an enema.
"Kalb offered a very grim take on the nuclear stalemate with Iran" --- Marvin would be grim if Catherine Zeta Jones was sitting in his lap in her underwear.
...though he did add "imagine the reaction if the U.S. were to bomb another Moslem country."
that's why i say let the isralies do it
Just yesterday, this lefty was leading a Bush bashing seminar on CSPAN, featuring John Dean who said the president was breaking all kinds of laws gathering signals intelligence as Kalb nodded his head in agreement.
Another player was an editor from the Nation. Don't know who the rest were, since I kept clicking once I heard the crap coming out of Dean.
It did, but let's be fair; that was Iraq's only nuclear facility. And it wasn't operational yet.
In the case of Iran, you have multiple facilities. And while the common censensus is that they are a number of years away from a nuke, I personally believe they are closer.
Even with nukes, you couldn't guarantee a 100% clearance rate on Iran's ability to both create weapons and any possible inventory they may already possess.
I'd rather see a covert op to sabotage a plant and have it go critical. Make them scared to use the plants.
I don't think it'll work either. Our bombing of Osirak was a surprise; this won't be -- the Iranians have taken more than adequate preparations to distribute risk and fortify command centers. I'm not sure of the best way to proceed, but simple air strikes will not alone work.
From what I've read there doesn't seem to be any way to take out the whole program frm the air. We would need enough good intelligence to be able to tell where the bottlenecks are and concentrate there.
Let's hope we have good intelligence this time.
The bombing raid on Osirak worked, but the Iranians have studied that and drawn conclusions: dig deep, conceal, and disperse. Facilities that cannot be hidden or dug in deep enough can be put `in the basement', with civilian human shields on top.
It is casual nonsense to presume that there is any simple, surgical way to stop Iran from getting nukes. Kalb is right. Bombing wouldn't work. It would inflame passions without incinerating much of the dirty work itself.
Kalb must be right. We should let the Mullahs get nukes and destroy New York City and our economy. A brilliant plan! [NOT]
I should add that in addition to the military difficulties, the political difficulties would be enormous. For one thing, Ahmedinejad is currently very weak, having alienated both the Khamenite clerics and, obviously, the reformers. But an attack would give him the chance to consolidate power -- it would play right into his hand.
Why... it might be as violent as if we were to print Cartoons of their 'Prophet'.
What else can they do?
There's only one way to know for sure. Let's find out.