Dr. Paul has reinforced his belief that a nuclear Iran is not threat. But has it occurred to the Grand-Poobah of foreign policy, or his doey-eyed followers, that most of the damage Iran has done in the region or the world has been at the hand of Iran’s proxies?
Dr. Paul suggests that we should approach Iran like we did Russia or China. That we should negotiate with them. Great idea except that Iran will be more than happy to talk, and negotiate, and barter at great length while they develop and then move nuclear weapons, technology and material wherever it will advance their goals. Are we convinced a Nuclear Iran does not assist in the development of a Nuclear Syria, or Turkey, or some other Middle-East nation? We are to believe that a Nuclear Iran, which has been moving conventional weapons to Hezbollah and others would never think of doing the same with other weapons?
I’d like to hear his thoughts on that. I would like to know why an Iran with nuclear weapons will not treat them as they have every other force at their disposal. Why, Dr. Paul, would a suicidal regime that has promised to destroy other nations, and has committed every weapon it can to other parties to facilitate that end, not try to do the same thing if it succeeds in developing nuclear capability?