Clarke: More Reasons to Invade Iran Than Iraq

[maddezmom]

VIENNA (Reuters) - It would have made more sense to invade Iran than Iraq (news - web sites), says a former U.S. counterterrorism adviser who has already accused the Bush administration of being soft on terrorism and wasting resources by attacking Iraq.


~snip~

"If you take the case of Iran, its nuclear program is far more advanced than Iraq's was," Clarke told the Austrian daily Der Standard in an interview translated into German. "There would have been far more grounds to invade there (Iran)."


The United States believes Iran's nuclear program is a front for developing atomic weapons. Tehran denies this, saying its atomic ambitions are limited to generating electricity.

The U.S. military has found none of the caches of Iraqi WMD that Washington said Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) had possessed in abundance.

~snip~
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&ncid=578&e=7&u=/nm/20040608/ts_nm/iran_usa_clarke_dc

[leesa]

1. O Goodie. Maybe we can do that next! These fools always

conveniently ignore the fact that the US and Israel are both rogue nations bristling with nuclear weapons. What about THESE terrorists Clarke?

[bemildred]

2. There are more reasons NOT to invade Iran than NOT to invade Iraq, too. nt

[bluestateguy]

3. Great, give the Bushbots another soundbite

Timeline: June, 2005 the US is massing troops on the Iraq/Iran border for an impending invasion and some right wing pundit will now have the following soundbite to use:

"Your guy, Richard Clarke said it, that we should invade Iran..."

[maggrwaggr]

4. hell, it would have made more sense to have invaded Canada

than Iraq

Or Norway.

Or Mexico.

Or .______________