The outcome of a strike on Iran's nuclear sites, no matter how destructive, can never be as bad for Israel as an Iran armed with nuclear weapons, former Mossad chief Danny Yatom said on Wednesday at a security conference at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University.
Yatom took up a position that is diametrically opposed to that of former Mossad head Meir Dagan, who sparked significant controversy by stating earlier this year that an attack on Iran would be a foolish move that would lead to a war with an unknown outcome.
THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THE FACT THAT ADVICE DOESN'T COME IN BOXES MARKED "GOOD ADVICE" AND "BAD ADVICE".
THIS IS WHY NATIONS NEED PRINCIPLED LEADERS WITH DEEP VALUES AND COURAGE TO MAKE THE BEST POSSIBLE DECISIONS.
DECISIONS LIKE THIS ONE - WHETHER OR NOT TO ATTACK IRAN PREEMPTIVELY, AND WHEN TO DO IT - ARE NOT IQ TESTS.
THEY ARE MORAL TESTS.
AND THIS IS WHY I PREFER A PRESIDENT TO HAVE DEEP MORAL CONVICTIONS BASED ON SOLID TRADITIONAL AMERICAN AND JUDEO-CHRISTIAN VALUES THAN AN IVY LEAGUE DEGREE.
BIBI HAS THESE VALUES AND PRINCIPLES.
OBAMA DOESN'T.
AND THIS IS WHY ISRAEL CANNOT TRUST THE USA ON THIS ISSUE AND SHOULD ATTACK AS SOON AS IT DEEMS NECESSARY.
SHOULD THE USA LEAD OR JOIN THE ATTACK, THEN I WILL COMMEND OBAMA FOR IT - THOUGH I SUSPECT THAT IF HE DOES ATTACK IRAN IT WOULD BE TO SAVE HIS REELECTION CAMPAIGN.
SIGH.
1 comment:
Well put.
And this is why I continue to be enamored with Herman Cain even though I think his miscues are an embarrassment.
I recognize Cain is probably unelectable, but he is the first and only candidate for POTUS I have ever actually liked.
Post a Comment