Sorry. I just can't let this pass without comment.

Comments

Tom Garrett 2 years, 1 month ago

A letter to the editor says that we should have attacked Libya when our embassy was attacked.

I have no difference with the writer over the anger felt regarding the killing and injury of Americans on what is traditionally regarded in international law as the territory of the nation involved. The attack occurred on U. S. territory.

I do have a problem with the idea that we should attack a foreign nation for an attack which was not performed by, fomented by, or colluded in by the government of that nation.

In Iran, under Jimmy Carter, things were different. It was the head of the revolution who caused the attack on the American embassy, and it was that same leader who refused to punish those who were guilty, and it was that same leader who went so far as to hold our people hostage.

In that case, had it been left to me, there would have been a stern warning, followed by an ultimatum, followed by a declaration of war.

But when a rabble attacks an embassy without warning, blame the rabble. Punish the rabble.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.