Yes, boys and girls, it's time for another genius letter to the editor from the home state of Russ Feingold, Liberace and Jeffrey Dahmer.
I love the writer's point that bombing Iran's nuclear facilities would only delay that country's ability to build a bomb. If I follow that same logic, then there was really no point in my father having a quintuple bypass at age 70, as it was only delaying more serious heart problems that might come later. Never mind that not having a bypass would have killed him. There's apparently no point in delaying the worst.
Now, here's our star of the week:
Attacking Iran is a bad idea
Every day, I read something about the deteriorating relationship between the United States and Iran. Each day, there seems to be a new threat of military action by Iranians or by us.
The U.S. and Iran have been adversaries since the fall of the shah, but it seems as if we have never been closer to war than we are now. I take a personal interest in this situation because our eldest son is deployed in Kuwait with his Army unit. If the U.S. and Iran go to war, our son will necessarily be a part of that.
I can understand the concern of many people, especially the Israelis, regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions. What I don't understand is how a bombing attack on Iran by Israel and/or the U.S. will effectively end Iran's potential for becoming a nuclear power. I cannot see how a bombing raid can make a lasting difference in Iran's attempts to produce an atomic weapon. Bombing the Iranian facilities might set back the program for a few years, but it wouldn't eliminate the problem.
Perhaps the idea is that if we bomb Iran, the Iranian people will rise up against their government. I don't see much evidence in history to support that notion. It is more likely that an air attack on Iran would cause the population to rally around the mullahs. When we bombed Germany during World War II, did the Germans rise up against Adolf Hitler? When we bombed North Vietnam, was there any attempt to overthrow Ho Chi Minh?
If the dream is to achieve regime change in order to halt the nuclear research, that means we have to invade Iran. I cannot see how that would end successfully. We just finished an attempt at nation-building in Iraq, and that did not turn out well. Our efforts in Afghanistan have not achieved our goals. An invasion of Iran is bad idea, a very bad idea.
To my mind, the only rational solution is to work out some kind of political arrangement with Iran. Unfortunately, the time available to cut a deal with Iran is limited. We are running out of time to find a peaceful solution and avoid an unnecessary war. My son may be running out of time, too.
Francis Pauc
Oak Creek
I understand her fears for her son, and hope that no harm comes to him. If any of his buddies in Kuwait read the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, though, I suspect he's not happy she wrote this.
