Although the president touted economic sanctions against Iran as the best way to stop the rogue nation from its quest for nuclear weapons, he has, from the onset of his 2008 campaign, put great faith in his own power to negotiate a solution with the mullahs. In 2008, he famously said that he...
Well, I see our choices as follows: 1. Meddle so that we encourage regime change in the hopes of the outcome Chavez predicts. 2. A decisive military strike that will restore our deterence and fear with the mullahs, or 3. Do nothing, like you and Ron Paul would like, until one or more of our major cities are a pile of radioactive rubble. Then, if we still have the ability, we can try to strike back with our nukes. So, I guess you prefer nuclear war to "meddling" or a limited military strike, MoreFreedom.
The final debate between President Obama and Gov. Romney won't likely change the course of the election with barely more than a week to go, but one sticking point in the debate -- U.S. policy toward Iran -- could well change hopes for peace in the world.
- Ted Cruz meeting with House conservatives to try to block Boehner’s border crisis bill Allahpundit 18 minutes ago
- Liberal interventionists silent on ISIS’s medieval brutality Noah Rothman 58 minutes ago
- U.S. sends subtle shot at the United Nations over complicity in Gaza violence Noah Rothman 1 hour ago
- Polls show Israel in lockstep with Netanyahu on Gaza war Ed Morrissey 2 hours ago
- Constitutional law professor on separation of powers: “Stop hatin’ all the time” Allahpundit 2 hours ago
- Video: A huge executive amnesty for illegals would be a big mistake, says … Ed Schultz? Allahpundit 3 hours ago