I asked this previously, but no Paulestinian answered.
Didn’t that NIE state that Iran stopped their nuclear program because of international pressure? If the NIE is true, it would mean sanctions have worked and are a good alternative to military action.
If Paul was President instead of Bush, there would have been no sanctions, pressure or threats of military action; a President Paul would have allowed Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.
“If Paul was President instead of Bush, there would have been no sanctions, pressure or threats of military action;”
If Paul was President,...it would truly be the beginning of the end of american civilization, and I don’t think a whole lot of people want that right now, except for his multiple personalities that are giving him subconscious advice.
RP: “Take that Back.”
RP: “Yeah, what he said!”
Sanctions did nothing. Sanctions rarely, if ever, work.
Threat of war - real, full-scale, faster-than-we-toppled-Saddam war - is what gave Iran pause (IF they have paused).
I don’t put much trust in what the public is told about how intelligence and diplomacy play out; they’re the kind of thing that thrives on public deception, where the real actions occur in murmured tones in quiet hallways.
The question for Paul is: what are his principles for declaring and pursuing war?
The question for you is: what is wrong with those principles? (address them at face value, not in light of emotionally-charged circumstances.)