|
Why the U.S. doesn’t oppose Israeli nukes
An item at NRO appreciates the unusually intelligent and plain-spoken man who is our current Secretary of Defense:
At the recent conference in Munich, Rumsfeld was asked why the United States doesn’t make a fuss about Israeli nuclear weapons. We’re supposed to be against nukes, right? Why don’t we go after Israel? Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 17, 2004 10:10 AM | Send Comments
Secretary Rumsfeld is quite correct in his statement. Though the other answer is they are our allies and have been our allies for a long time. To this end with a continueing crisis in the middle east of our world, we need a strong and true ally there. Israel gives us that ally they would gladly allow us access to there airports to go to war against a terrorist nation state, compare this to Saudi Arabia’s most recent actions and you will have you answer. Posted by: Will on February 17, 2004 10:45 AMWhat a refreshing change of pace from usual answers from government officials ! I’d like to see more of this. Posted by: Allan Wall on February 17, 2004 7:39 PMIsrael is the glove on the hand of the U.S. And don’t forget, our investment in money and resources makes this relationship defensively viable. In a sense, our presence, via Israel’s compliance, is mutually the only alternative for us. To abandon our role would be to lose our stategic balance in the Middle East. Israel’s nuclear might is not an option; it is an unavoidable right. Considering its size, in comparison to its enemies, it is equivalent to 49 American states attacking Rhode Island. If anything, the use of superior defenses can at least an intimidating factor. But most importantly, we know that Israel is not so radical as to employ such power against any aggressor. It would only have to as a last resort. And that juncture is remote at this time. Posted by: Joan Vail on February 17, 2004 10:53 PMAt least there is one man left who tells it like it is. Posted by: RF on February 18, 2004 8:57 PM |