American Free Press
Tuesday, Oct 13th, 2009
TWO TOP REPUBLICAN SENATORS are not happy enough that the United States is waging two major wars and multiple small skirmishes along the east coast of Africa. They want the U.S. military to initiate a full-scale, genocidal war against Iran. Why? Because they don’t want to put “too much pressure on Israel.”
Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) and Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) went on national television on Sunday, Oct. 3, saying that the U.S. military should not only bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities, but should launch an “all-or-nothing” war against the Persian country with the goal of obliterating it.
And why should U.S. soldiers risk their own lives to kill innocent Iranians? To protect Israel, of course.
“If the sanctions fail, and Iran’s going down the road to get a nuclear weapon, any Sunni Arab state that could, would want a nuclear weapon,” he said. “Israel will be more imperiled . . . and I would rather our allies and us take military action if it’s necessary.”
But bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities, which are operating legally under international laws signed by every nuclear power except Israel, India and Pakistan—all allies of the United States—would not be good enough for Graham.
“If we use military action against Iran, we should not only go after their nuclear facilities,” he said. “We should destroy their ability to make conventional war. They should have no planes that can fly and no ships that can float.”
And why should an invasion be launched by the United States and not Israel, which the senator agrees is really the only country that might be threatened by a nuclear Iran? “It’s too much pressure to put on Israel,” said Graham.
But can Iran really be considered a threat to anyone? With a population of 70 million, Iran spends just over $7 billion annually on its military. Compare that to Israel, with a population of 7 million, which spends over $13 billion a year on its weapons, and the United States, with a population of 300 million, which spends $600 billion on war.
While Graham did most of the talking, cheerleader Chambliss couldn’t stop nodding in agreement.
“Lindsey’s right,” added Chambliss. “It’s an all or nothing deal. . . . A full-out military strike is what it would take.”
This article was posted: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 3:56 am