Replies

And when Israel went in and took out that nuclear reactor in the early 1980s, actually I was one of the very few Republicans who supported it! It's in their interest to deal with it.

Paul liked when Israel used a "pre-emptive" strike.

Paul liked when Israel used a "pre-emptive" strike.

He may even have approved of Reagan's strike against Moamar Ghadafi, for all I know.

The fact remains that Israel had the "DEFENSIVE" posture necessary to wage a Just War and obligated itself to exactly that offense necessary to remove the threat and "win" the objective it set out to meet.

We are not meeting that model.

You know as well as I do that Iraq poses a clear and CONSTANT direct danger to Israel. MOST of the Arab/Muslim states do. I can't think of anyone better suited to take down Saddam or anyone having more justification. WE, on the other hand, appear to be more bent on "Nation Building," or empire building, to the detriment of our direct war on terrorists. Therein lies the difference. I tend to very much agree with Dr. Paul on this.

IF (and given the hysteria right now, it's a BIG IF) there is full and reasoned debate on the subject and the motivations are correct and precedent is not established, then I would have little or no heartburn about taking Saddam Insane down. BUT NOT UNTIL THEN. Right now, though, Congress seems to want to give Dubya ITS powers to declare war. That is wrong and ill-thought out.