And secondly, how could we ever be sure that we had struck all of the existing sites?
Sounds like a fuckup of apocalyptic proportions in the making.
Edit -- This is my favorite part of the article:
The Bush administration has unwisely ballyhooed the doctrine of "preemption," which all previous presidents have sustained as an option rather than a dogma. It has applied the doctrine to Iraq, where the intelligence pointed to a threat from weapons of mass destruction that was much smaller than the risk North Korea poses. (The actual threat from Saddam Hussein was, we now know, even smaller than believed at the time of the invasion.)
They're joking, right? THERE WAS NO ACTUAL THREAT, you pinheads. And the result has been a disaster. Now we have an actual threat, and you want to create an even bigger disaster?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
