Submitted by Krogenar (not verified) on Tue, 12/04/2007 - 16:05.
This feels like shades of Iraq all over again. We have:
1) A rogue regime that acts provactively towards the West.
2) A consensus among intelligence communities that the regime is dangerous.
So what would happen if we attacked Iran, only to discover ... their nuclear program consisted of two goats powering a single cyclotron.
Oops.
I wouldn't feel badly about attacking Iran even under those circumstances. If you approach someone with your hand under your coat, pretending as though you have a gun, and are shot dead ... well, think about it more carefully next time.
Maybe the 'Red Team' approach was there so that the administration could claim due diligence, and kill any more 'cherry-picking' talk early on?
This feels like shades of
This feels like shades of Iraq all over again. We have:
1) A rogue regime that acts provactively towards the West.
2) A consensus among intelligence communities that the regime is dangerous.
So what would happen if we attacked Iran, only to discover ... their nuclear program consisted of two goats powering a single cyclotron.
Oops.
I wouldn't feel badly about attacking Iran even under those circumstances. If you approach someone with your hand under your coat, pretending as though you have a gun, and are shot dead ... well, think about it more carefully next time.
Maybe the 'Red Team' approach was there so that the administration could claim due diligence, and kill any more 'cherry-picking' talk early on?