The debate even makes its way into Congress, on occasion. But, is it fair to characterize this as a neo-con attitude? Is it fair to pin this entirely on the "war-mongering" GOP?
If we read this article, we see that Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State under President Clinton, is doing her share of banging the skins, so to speak.
Former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright does not rule out a war against Iran in the nuclear dispute between Tehran and the international community.
'This last resort can never be given up completely,' the Czech-born Albright who also served as US ambassador to the United Nations, told Prague-based CT1 television.
It can even be said that Hillary is using drumsticks, as we can see from her website:
As I have long said and will continue to say, U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons. And in dealing with this threat, as I've also said for a long time, no option can be taken off the table.
Dems seem to be positioning themselves for what may be the inevitable. If they win back the White House, they may be forced to face a stark reality here, which is why I think they are taking similar positions that many in the GOP have been and are taking. In all of this, I haven't heard anything different from the Administration.
Where the difference lies will be in identifying the cause. Note this tidbit, also from Sen. Clinton's site:
In dealing with the threats posed by the Iranian regime, which has gained its expanding influence in Iraq and the region as a result of the Administration's policies....
Blame who you want, call it what you want. It is what it is. And it's not going away.
But, if you think that we are all in the current state we are in, solely because of the Bush policies in Iraq, you might want to re-think that thought. Iran has been working on this kind of thing long before Iraq was ever invaded. Their goal, since the fall of the Shah, is to export Islamic revolution everywhere possible, using any means possible.
I do not support war at this time. But how can war be avoided, if sanctions aren't implemented and given an adequate amount of time to have an effect? Those that scream the loudest about the irrational nature of beating the war drums, need to recognize that waiting longer to implement them, only makes war more likely. The time to sanction Iran is before they get a bomb, not after.