Quite apart from the moral issues here (horrifying), or the basic strategic implications (also horrifying), these comments by a veteran member of the US House from Dallas are simply bizarre from a logical standpoint - the US should respond to CHEMICAL weapons that MIGHT exist and MIGHT be used, by launching an aggressive first strike with NUCLEAR weapons that DO exist and WILL be used to kill untold thousands (or more) who've never done a thing the US or Americans, and have no plans to. What exactly does that do to protect Americans, fight WMD proliferation, rogue behavior, etc.? Simply making the comments undermines our position and damages our reputation. If this guy actually thinks this stuff ... what's he doing in Congress?
Posted by armand at February 28, 2005 11:23 AM | TrackBack | Posted to Politics