Romney: US has moral duty to block Iran
US Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has said his country has a "moral imperative" to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
Mr Romney, speaking during a visit to Jerusalem, said Iran was the most destabilising country in the world.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19035134
I do not know about "a moral imperative". I do know that if Iran is allowed to start producing nuclear weapons, the floodgates of nuclear proliferation will be fully opened, making nuclear war more likely down the road. In addition the chances of terrorist groups getting nukes goes up significantly. And a nuclear-armed Iran would likely feel much less constrained in taking more direct action against Israel and the Saudis, and using its terrorist Hizbollah tool against the west.
I feel curtailing Pakistan's nuclear proliferation should be higher up on the agenda than Iran's ambitions at this time. Increasing instability and radical, religious fanaticism alone should make us fear what will happen if the weapons or technology fall into wrong hands
North Korea got their A-bomb, but South is still intact... i know you see little help to solve this issue in UN Security Council, but US rhetoric can't just sounds like "let's wipe Iran off the map". Is there any legal penalty for breach in NPT?
As I suspected Israel (or "Isreal" for Americans) is a far easier thing for Romney than Britain.
strongly worded letters followed by embargoes most of the UNSC member states will ignore.Originally Posted by Szarko32c
And American media has a moral duty to block this guy's statements. I'm not an American so I haven't followed his speeches much or his view on Iran, but how higher does the possibility of war with Iran get if he gets elected?
March 2013 maybe?
Has there been a Repub presidential candidate in memory who was *not* labeled a "warmonger" by the left? I cannot remember one.
Honestly... both Romney and Obama seem to employ the same type of rhetoric in regards to Iran's nuclear program in my opinion.
Yes, but politics is all about creating your own image of your opponent, instead of letting what they actually say define them. Obama has the media largely on his side, so although as you pointed out they are saying pretty much the same thing, the media is spinning Romney as the 'warmonger' and Obama as the level-headed leader.
Iran the most destabilising country in the world? What a joke.
Than who is? Irans backing of alot of groups sure puts it near the top...
The title of 'the most destabilising country in the world' is stupid. I'm not saying its the perfect country and I know it backs certain groups, but I can think of a few more countries that would outrank Iran.
Very true I misread your post. But none of those countries would provide a good sound bite for Romney's campaign.
Is the axis of evil still legit?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote