Are Republican?s Content to settle on a Platform of Torture and Aggressive Nuclear Warfare? June 7, 2007

by Will

During the South Carolina Republican presidential debate, most of the ten aspiring nominees endorsed the use of torture against terrorist suspects. In the subsequent debate in New Hampshire, several of them spoke approvingly of the use of nuclear weapons against Iran.

Congressman Duncan Hunter explicitly stated that as president ?I would authorize the use of tactical nuclear weapons? in order to destroy Iran's nuclear program. Rudolph Giuliani, Jim Gilmore, and Mitt Romney all said that they would leave that option on the table. Following the debate, prospective candidate Fred Thompson eagerly joined the ?Nuke Iran? chorus as well.

Of the Republican presidential aspirants, only Congressman Ron Paul of Texas spoke in opposition to a pre-emptive nuclear strike. ?We have to come to our senses about this issue of war and preemption,? pleaded Representative Paul, pointing out that Iran, although governed by a hideous regime, has never attacked or threatened the United States.

Are Republicans content to settle for a platform built on torture and aggressive nuclear warfare?

Let us stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free.

No feedback yet