A few days ago Duncan Hunter, a Republican member of the House Armed Services Committee, suggested that the U.S. should plan to use nuclear weapons in a military conflict with Iran.
He said: "If you hit Iran, you do it with tactical nuclear devices and set them back a decade or two or three.”
Of course, Hunter failed to mention the consequences of the use of any nuclear weapons against Iran - among them the uncontrollable consequences of such weapons once released, the radioactive fallout and it's effects on the region, and the regional destabilization that it would most likely cause.
So much for diplomacy!!!
Hunter's statement demonstrates his total lack of understanding (on any level) of both the risks related to the use of any type of nuclear weapons and the realities of the situation with Iran. It is completely irresponsible on the part of any elected (or other) official to remotely suggest the use of nuclear weapons.
In an article titled Nukes Are Nuts David Krieger quoted former US secretary of state and four-star general Colin Powell who said "no sane leader would ever want to cross that line to using nuclear weapons. And, if you are not going to cross that line, then these things are basically useless." Yes - Nukes are certainly nuts (and most definitely "useless", and the people who consider them a viable weapon most certainly are nuttier than a nuke.
There must be only one line of conversation about the situation with Iran - DIPLOMACY!!!
As citizens we need to send a clear message to Congress that there is only one acceptable path toward a resolution of tensions with Iran and that is a diplomatic one.
Click here to send a message to your Senator supporting President Obama's diplomatic efforts to avoid military confrontation with Iran.
Trident Warhead Now Deadlier Than Ever
2 weeks ago