Friday, May 18, 2007

Dodd Refuses To Rule Out Force On Iran

By Cernig

For me, this is simply depressing. Chris Dodd is in many ways a good guy, but even he's sipped the Kool Aid over Iran. The only way someone would truthfully want to consider force against Iran's nuclear program is if they've swallowed the narrative put out by the Bush administration in countless examples of media stenography rather than looking at the actual proven evidence. It can only be justified if you assume a whole bunch of hearsay, supposition and outright fabrication will turn out to be true. That's how we got duped into invading Iraq.
Democratic presidential candidate Christopher Dodd said today that using military force ought to be an option in containing Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

"I would never take the military option off the table," the Connecticut senator told about 50 Democratic activists during a forum at Drake University. "That arrow is in my quiver."

But Dodd criticized the Bush administration for being too quick to threaten and use military force.

Dodd's hour-long event in Drake's Olmsted Center was broadcast live on the Internet, with satellite events held simultaneously in Burlington, Charles City, Decatur City, Iowa City and Sioux City.

Dodd also discussed his support for a measure that would have all U.S. combat troops out of Iraq by the end of March 2008.

He also took questions on a range of topics, including whether he supported direct negotiations with Iran and Syria, which have given support to terrorist organizations attacking U.S. forces in Iraq.

"Responsible leaders understand that negotiations are something you do with people you have a problem with," Dodd said.
Iran is still the tarbaby for American illwill based entirely upon the hostage crisis of 1979. Given that decades old fact, any other evil Iran might be accused of automatically becomes more believable, it seems.

And by the way, Sen. Dodds, what exactly do you think the "force" option should consist of? There are no credible military options against Iran and haven't been for a long time. Since 2003 to be exact.

Another possible explanation for Dodd's words is that, because of that tarbaby efect, he thinks voters will punish him if he rules out aggression against Iran. Even though he knows it's a dumb thing to say. That would be even more depressing.

No comments: