https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Go nuke or go home!

While admitting that the goal of keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of Iran is a non-trivial task, I find it remarkable that Rep. Hunter (R-CA) can speak so casually of dropping nuclear weapons on Iran ("tactical" ones, to be sure, but that just means Hiroshima-size) as (if I can quote another, more fictional nuke-suggester) "the only way to be sure."

Granted, he's offering that as a better alternative to boot-on-the-ground invasion, which he rightfully recognizes would be extremely costly in US lives (presumably his Marine Corps experience in Afghanistan and Iraq informs him about that).

But the idea that the US would preemptively use nuclear weapons, and be the first to use them since their solitary, horrifying deployment in WWII, would be a moral and geopolitical outrage from which the US would never recover — and rightfully so.

Reshared post from +Jeffrey Raskin

GOP House Member Says Attack On Iran Should Be Nuclear

"I don’t think it’s inevitable but I think if you have to hit Iran, you don’t put boots on the ground, you do it with tactical nuclear devices and you set them back a decade or two or three. I think that’s the way to do it with a massive aerial bombardment campaign."

This is the face of Today's GOP. These people are not "conservative."  They are radical reactionaries.

Congressman Says U.S. Should Use Nuclear Weapons If It Attacks Iran
Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) thinks the United States should use tactical nuclear weapons on Iran if it decides to use military force against its nuclear program.

106 view(s)  

9 thoughts on “Go nuke or go home!”

  1. +Dennis Jernberg Well, the "Iran is an existential threat that we will have to go to war with sooner or later" is straight out of the Neocon playbook (though in years past the "n" in the country name was scratched out and a "q" put in its place).  Hunter at least expresses hope that we won't have to go to war.

  2. +Dave Hill Of course, there's a whole lot more R's out there, and a few D's as well, who are far more eager to start a war with Iran, and they're perfectly willing to cheat to get their war whether the American people like it or not. That's the neocon way, alas. Some of these people make Hunter look like a "moderate", such as John "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" McCain for instance…

  3. Real conservatism is about PRACTICALITY.  This is what any member of the Republican Party up until the 1970s would have told you.  Anyone advocating a nuclear war is not practical, and thus not a real conservative.  He's a moron.

  4. To be fair, he did opine he hoped there would not be a war, and I'm not sure it's considered a nuclear war if just one side is lobbing nukes (as I think Hunter clearly thinks would be the case, and the intent).

    That said, I can't disagree with your conclusion.

  5. Can’t go along with the “No True Conservative” defense. Whatever some ideal Conservatism might be, the… current reality is laboratory grade Jingo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *