Why only Iran?

Submitted by Maureen (United States), Nov 1, 2006 at 09:31

Krauthammer says, "President Bush said that we must not "leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons." There's only one such current candidate: Iran."

Iran is NOT the only candidate. The Muslim world is full of them. The violently anti-American Pakistan (with its taqiya-toting president) has the bomb. The Libyans were making the bomb (and sold it to ?? before they were caught and allegedly "saw the light" and disarmed themselves). The Saudis have more than enough cash to buy and fund bombs -- and have funded their mosques (Sharia infrastructure) all over the US and the world, including Washignton D.C.

Why is Iran the only "nuclear" problem?

Let's think more strategically about countering and defending the West against the vast amounts of oil cash that are funding Medieval minds and mores.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".