Once a distant, mysterious land, the U.S. has become intensely embroiled in Middle Eastern politics. While simultaneously waging campaigns in both Afghanistan and Iraq, America has turned a wary eye to Iran and its alleged nuclear weapons. With the lives of potentially thousands of soldiers and citizens at stake in both countries, should the U.S. take direct military action against Iran?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
This Approach is Mistaken
- From David Bukay
By Dr. David Bukay - University of Haifa
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Shoot them before they shoot me!
The Iranians do not have WMD. There is no argument there. It has signed on to the non proliferation of these weapons. On the other hand the only country that has WMD in the Middle East is Israel. Now the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Consititution. Why is it that Iran cannot have WMD to defend itself against another Country. The fear that they might can be used against any other Country possesing the WMD. India, Pakistan, China etc. Perhaps invade someone with the ability or go broke.
Is the real reason to invade the WMD? Or is it the fact that the Federal Reserve does not have Iran under debt?
- Canknucklehead
September 8, 2008 8:28AM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.