Obama condemns assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist; Santorum disagrees
Don't even bother to follow the link to the original AP story - there's something else there now, but this is simply surreal (Hat Tip: Weasel Zippers via Memeorandum). GREENVILLE, S.C. (AP) —Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum is saying the U.S. should not have condemned the death of an Iranian nuclear scientist this week.I wonder how many other Republican candidates agree.
Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan died Wednesday, when a bomb attached to his car by a passing bicyclist exploded. The Obama administration condemned the killing.
Santorum said the administration’s public posture does not reflect a hard line on Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
To about 200 people in a crowded Greenville diner, he said: “Our country condemned it. My feeling is we should have kept our mouth shut.”
There are only two explanations for the Obama administration's actions. One is that Obama still thinks he can talk Iran out of developing nuclear weapons. Sorry, we Israelis are not going to stake our lives on that one forever.
The other is that Obama really doesn't care if the Iranians get nuclear weapons.
Unless you think Obama is delusional or stupid, I'd go with the second one.
Here's thanking Rick Santorum for speaking the truth and hoping he's in this campaign for a long time to come.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Campaign 2012, Iranian nuclear threat, RIck Santorum
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 1:48 AM
6 Comments:
Targeted assassination is illegal under international law, to say nothing of American law, or the laws of any other (allegedly) civilized country. You let your hatred of Iran grant you the permission make any sort of violence against them you like. You reveal yourself as no better than "them" in the the process. I invite you to grow up.
James,
What's the US doing in Pakistan these days? Isn't that targeted assassination? Do you think there's anything wrong with that?
Personally, I'm all in favor of it. Putting terrorists who are ticking time bombs on trial isn't realistic. That's why Gitmo is still open and still holding terrorists.
I agree with you Carl, the US's posture is bizarre regardless of the morals of targeted assassinations. Better to have kept quiet.
Isn't James a hoot?!? Targeted assassinations offend him, while the Obama philosophy is blasting away, including at American citizens he doesn't like, with DRONES? WTF, dude! Winning the Future! The bigger question for Americans to figure out is whether we will follow Obama in becoming darth vader in the fortress or will do our best to stop slaughters and upgrade opportunities for the poor to keep living better (on this planet)...
"Targeted assassination is illegal under international law"
Where in international law is there a prohibition against assassinations?
"Targeted assassination is illegal under international law"
Where in international law is there a prohibition against assassination?
Post a Comment
<< Home