Skip to comments.
GOP hopefuls won't rule out nukes in Iran
JTA ^
| 6/6/07
Posted on 06/06/2007 10:30:44 AM PDT by pabianice
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
1
posted on
06/06/2007 10:30:45 AM PDT
by
pabianice
To: pabianice
Four of the 10 candidates appearing at a debate Tuesday night in Manchester, N.H., were asked whether they would use tactical nuclear weapons in a pre-emptive strike. All four Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore said they would.
Preemptive war using nuclear weapons?...cripes...these guys sound like Dr. Strangelove
2
posted on
06/06/2007 10:38:26 AM PDT
by
Irontank
(Ron Paul for President)
To: pabianice
why can’t the next debate have the question, “how many MOAB’s would you drop?” That’d be fun?
3
posted on
06/06/2007 10:39:26 AM PDT
by
IllumiNaughtyByNature
(I buy gas for my SUV with the Carbon Offsets I sell on Ebay!)
To: pabianice
What are pres candidates supposed to say? ‘We have nukes but we won’t use them, so we might as well get rid of the nukes and let any tinhorn dictator take over American interests anywhere.”
4
posted on
06/06/2007 10:42:48 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the Treaty)
To: pabianice
I think Fred is the man, but if Guliani could drop his anti gun stance, I would like him. He has balls.
5
posted on
06/06/2007 10:44:56 AM PDT
by
Harry Pothead
(One issue voter, who wil kill islamofacists?)
To: pabianice
With the conventional weaponry we have, why would we use nukes?
Save the nukes for when one goes off here. Then flatten the whole region. And let the mullas know up front what’s coming instead of pussyfooting around.
6
posted on
06/06/2007 10:54:16 AM PDT
by
yobid
To: Irontank
Oh are you one of these “We can nuke every one of thier cities if they nuke us first” guys?
Excuse me... but since I live and work in downtown Chicago, I’ll be dead and dont give a rip about any response.. they must never be allowed to even touch a nuclear bomb and if that means nuking them in order to prevent it, so be it.
7
posted on
06/06/2007 10:56:52 AM PDT
by
pacelvi
To: pabianice
Another ridiculous question by Wolfie....(eyes rolling)
8
posted on
06/06/2007 10:57:47 AM PDT
by
Badeye
(You know its a kook site when they ban the word 'kook')
To: Irontank
Iran has already attacked us in many ways.
If we decide that we need to strike Iran it will be preemptive in the same sense that any attack is meant to preempt the next attack by your foe.
The peace at any costs crowd will always consider any attack a preemptive attack.
To: yobid
Save the nukes for when one goes off here. Then flatten the whole region. And let the mullas know up front whats coming instead of pussyfooting around
Are you crazy? Please tell us.. which city should we sacrifice first before you grant us the authority to defend ourselves.
10
posted on
06/06/2007 11:00:49 AM PDT
by
pacelvi
To: pabianice
I hate to say this, but Ron Paul is the guy who is most right on this. The idea that we would initiate a first-strike on Iran is ridiculous. It's a repudiation of almost 50 years of American policy - that we would never, ever be the first to take a conflict nuclear.
What the heck happened to the Republican party?
11
posted on
06/06/2007 11:01:48 AM PDT
by
jude24
(Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
To: pacelvi
What I’m saying is, use conventional bombs to blast their hopes. Not nukes. Yet.
12
posted on
06/06/2007 11:03:00 AM PDT
by
yobid
To: pacelvi
....and you can have Detroit and Dearborn. No loss there.
13
posted on
06/06/2007 11:04:14 AM PDT
by
yobid
To: Badeye
Another ridiculous question by Wolfie....(eyes rolling) Exactly! They should have shot back to Wolfie, "will you rule out executing a panic stop in your automobile as you drive home tonight"?
14
posted on
06/06/2007 11:05:06 AM PDT
by
MarineBrat
(My wife and I took an AIDS vaccination that the Church offers.)
To: pabianice
"....California Rep. Duncan Hunter, was more direct, saying the United States reserved the right to dissuade Iran militarily. "I would authorize the use of tactical nuclear weapons if there was no other way to preempt those particular centrifuges," he said, while noting it could probably be done with conventional weapons.
But Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a candidate drawing about 2 percent in opinion polls, opposed a nuclear strike on moral grounds and because he believed Iran was no threat to U.S. national security.
"We, in the past, have always declared war in defense of our liberties or go to aid somebody," Paul said. "But now we have accepted the principle of preemptive war. We have rejected the just war theory of Christianity."
excerpt from a different article
15
posted on
06/06/2007 11:06:40 AM PDT
by
OB1kNOb
( KILL (the) BILL !! WHERE'S THE FENCE ? Vote Conservative. Vote Duncan Hunter - 2008)
To: MarineBrat
‘Exactly! They should have shot back to Wolfie, “will you rule out executing a panic stop in your automobile as you drive home tonight”?’
Or ‘will you rule out the ‘war slut’ Amanpour from demeaning America next time she’s on the air with you Wolfie?’
16
posted on
06/06/2007 11:07:14 AM PDT
by
Badeye
(You know its a kook site when they ban the word 'kook')
To: pabianice
17
posted on
06/06/2007 11:07:23 AM PDT
by
The Louiswu
(Never Forget!)
To: yobid
If the objective is to destroy thier nuclear faciltiies, they are too hardened to be damaged by conventional bombs.
If you just bomb for the sake of bombing them (the facilities), then you just enraged their people for no effect.
Tactical nukes will probably have to be used in order to destroy the facilities. These facilities are not in the cities.
If you dont mean bombing their facilities then I have no idea what you mean by “blast their hopes”
18
posted on
06/06/2007 11:07:44 AM PDT
by
pacelvi
To: yobid
19
posted on
06/06/2007 11:08:11 AM PDT
by
pacelvi
To: jude24
You need to update your world-view pal.
20
posted on
06/06/2007 11:09:14 AM PDT
by
pacelvi
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson