The world will always have mad bombers, but state-sponsored terrorism can and must be defeated. If Iran were taken out of the equation, the militias in the top three trouble spots would lose their funding. And a budding nuclear power would be de-fanged.
I can tolerate people who point out reasons why we should approach an attack on Iran with caution. But I truly don't undertand people (like my neighbor) who thinks attacking Iran would make the world more dangerous.
"I live in MA. I know quite a few people who think that terrorism can never be defeated, so we are foolish to try ("It just makes things worse.")
The world will always have mad bombers, but state-sponsored terrorism can and must be defeated. If Iran were taken out of the equation, the militias in the top three trouble spots would lose their funding. And a budding nuclear power would be de-fanged.
I can tolerate people who point out reasons why we should approach an attack on Iran with caution. But I truly don't undertand people (like my neighbor) who thinks attacking Iran would make the world more dangerous."
Well, we either go all the way to the source in Iran or we here in the USA really should change our strategy to do almost nothing. We could simply focus on energy independance, pull our people from the Middle East and let Jordan, Egypt and Israel deal with the problem with our intelligence support. I don't think Iran will go away so I am an advocate of war at this stage but this half-assed approach of tip-toeing around the tiger is not working.