BLITZER: Does she have a point, Congressman?
HOEKSTRA: Yes, I think it would be a huge mistake to consider that we would take a military action into Iran. I think she’s laid out a…
BLITZER: Well, what about opening a dialogue — trying to open dialogue with the supreme leader of Iran?
HOEKSTRA: Well, that was going to be my second point. I believe that reaching out and engaging with Iran, but doing so with Russia, doing so with our European allies, recognizing that they do have contacts into Iran, and engaging in a full-court diplomatic press with Iran is a good thing to begin the process of doing that.
You know, we’re not going to go into Iran militarily. The senator is absolutely right. Iran is not Iraq. And going in there militarily would be, from my perspective, a huge mistake.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
WHAT HAPPENED TO HOEKSTRA?
He is (was?) a favorite of the talk radio war whores but seems to be turning against Bush and the neo-cons. First, he criticizes the criminal Bush regime for withholding information about the Syria reactor and then he puts military action against Iran behind diplomatic efforts. From Amanda at ThinkProgress:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
"I find it difficult to believe that Iranians would allow weapons to be traced back to them easily with manufacture dates on them," said Vali Nasr, an expert on Shiite politics at Tufts University. He said nothing in the allegations was new. What is new, he said, is the United States' need to justify its expansion of its operations to southern Iraq in support of Maliki's offensive.
The Iranian angle provides that justification, especially in the eyes of most Americans, Nasr said. "The threshold for demonization of Iran is fairly low. The public would readily believe the worst about Iran," he said.
from LA Times
Post a Comment