While many commentators have roundly criticized Mike Wallace for letting the Iranian President walk all over him in the recent 60 Minutes interview, the reality-based community at Daily Kos is upset that Wallace was so terribly rude to Amadinnerjihad:

The comments to the poll are here. This is a fun one:

Ahmadinejad seemed to be more in touch with reality than our Dear Leader....

At least it sounded like he takes time in the day to stay current on things other than his own narrow focused agenda (meaning Bush's way).

As to any statements regarding Israel and the Holocaust - we don't know of anyone who uses inflammatory rhetoric, do we?

Sadly, due to Mike Wallace's condescending behavior and the own demonstrated incompetence and obtuseness of George Bush, I couldn't help thinking that in another time and place, Ahmadinejad with his education and obviously quick wit would have been more than a match for the dolt we have running our country.

Iran has no such history of instability, and is in fact one of the few stable democracies in the mideast - even though it might not be a form you or I might like, as it's closer to the religious democracy right-wing Christians would prefer. When only one antagonistic power in a region has nukes, you can argue that it's an unstable situation, such as when India had them before Pakistan. Right now, only Israel has them in the mideast, and has indicated a willingness to use them. Iran is in a dangerous neighborhood, with 3 antagonistic nuclear powers within striking range of its territory. And the most dangerous, aggressive, hostile nuclear power in the world, the US, has made threats against it.

Let's see: the NPT specifically ALLOWS uranium enrichment as well as other technical research. There is no apparent evidence to date, according to the UN, that Iran has a weapons program. You seem to assume there is one because...the Bush administration says there is? What other assumptions have you swallowed from Bush?

In my view, Iran NEEDS nuclear weapons, if only to hold the US at bay - a government which has made clear threats against Iran, has a previous history in overthrowing Iran's democracy, and a recent history in waging unprovoked war against one of Iran's neighbors. Further, Iran is now bordered on two sides by the military forces of that same government.

Posted by: Ragnar at 11:23 PM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 412 words, total size 3 kb.