0 votes

Kristol: ‘Better’ for US to attack Iran than if Israel did

The Obama administration should be seriously considering a strike on Iran, according to neoconservative Fox News contributor Bill Kristol.

An Israeli Deputy Defense Minister said last week that he expected Israel would have to attack Iran within a year. Kristol believes it would be better for the US to attack first.

"I think we have to have a credible threat of force and the preparation to use force against Iran. It would be much better if we used force against -- to delay the Iranian nuclear program than if Israel did and there is no evidence that the US government is being at all serious about the use force there," Kristol told Fox News' Chris Wallace Sunday.

Nina Easton, also appearing on the Fox News Sunday panel, quickly rebuked Kristol. "Use of force. You say that so blithely as if use of force -- what happens to next day after the use of force?" she asked. "I think it behooves us to get the international community together. You have to have sanctions and you have to have a clear threat of force."

The narrow range of debate on Fox News varied only slightly from sanctions and threatening force to launching a US-led war on Iran. Easton said she would also like to see the Obama administration "curry dissent" in Iran.

Story continues below...

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0404/kristol-us-strike-on-iran-i...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

here we go again--

what on earth can be done with these drunken 'toddlers' who are waving loaded pistols in the air--

I have no desire for violence, but this man is breathing the same air as I--

and in my dreams I would lock him up--

and throw away the key.

And feed him only bread and water--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Better for who?

We're up to necks in blood from other illegal wars, why would we want another?

Our economy is going belly up while Israel is booming...there seems to be a pattern here.

END the FED before it ENDS US

War is the health of the State.

I think Bastiat said that and I agree with him up to a point. As the populace deals with an external threat it is willing to surrender more power and treasure to its rulers. However, there is only so much load an economy can bear before it begins to falter and our economy is already faltering. One could say that a troubled economy is also "the health of the State" and we need look no further than the Obama administration's engulfing huge wedges of the economic pie "to avoid catastrophe" as an example. But again I say there is a limit. It's hard for a government to retain power when utter economic devastation reigns. So sure, let's pile on another war!

New Hampshire and Ecuador.

.

Rats!

Prepare & Share the Message of Freedom through Positive-Peaceful-Activism.

I can hardly stand to look at this shyster Neo-Con.

Bill Kristol defines the word Neo-Con.

His dad actually began the movement.

The Weekly Standard (which Kristol writes for) is a traitorous publication which is an INSULT to the sacrifices of our founders.

"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
-Ron Paul