There are conflicts in the world, certainly, conflicts that don't directly involve us.
And we are trying to use sanctions and negotiation, along with other nations.
Terrorists act outside of official governments, and it is counterproductive to attack whole countries, poisoning their environments, leaving waste behind that will kill and disable their unborn babies and poison their future, hurting civilians. We learned that, didn't we? In the end, it took a few good men (Navy Seals) and good intelligence to find Osama Bin Laden and rescue hostages in Africa.
Fareed Zakaria (CNN, Time Magazine), writing about Iran's potential nuclear development, wrote that before India and Pakistan had nuclear capacity, they had had many wars that resulted in many deaths. In the 40 years since they have had nuclear capacity, they have had deterrence, and the wars have ceased.
Iran wants nuclear power because Israel has nuclear power. If Iran had nuclear power, would Israel continue to feel comfortable in the way it treats the Palestinians? Would it return the territories it seized n the 8 days war? Would there be more peace instead of less?
No one is saying that Iran's nuclear capacity would be a good thing----wouldn't it be good if every country laid down its arms?
Maybe it's time for the US to start using its brains instead of its brawn.
I've said many times that developing alternative forms of energy, lowering world demand for oil, would do more for world peace than ten years of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan did...
With less income and less valuable natural resources, the middle east becomes a lot less dangerous, without our firing a shot.
What's happening in the military parallels what's happened in private industry. Wake up and smell the coffee. It's happened to union members, teachers, firemen, policemen, employees in banking and every other industry. They've all lost their benefits and their pensions....
No wonder why so many became Democrats.
