Green Greenwald has a great point about the recent assassination of another Iranian nuclear scientist. He compares the reaction to the actual assassination of Iranian scientists to the reaction to Glenn Reynold’s suggestion of same:
What’s most remarkable here is to compare the boisterous, furious denunciations of the mere suggestion by a blogger on the Internet that Iranian scientists be killed, versus the relative silence in the face of its actually being done in real life, now that the corpses of murdered Iranian scientists are beginning to pile up. Does anyone doubt that some combination of the two nations completely obsessed with Iran’s nuclear program — Israel and the U.S. — are responsible? (U.S. officials deny involvement while pointing the finger at Israel, whose officials will not comment but “smile” when asked; the CIA has “targeted” Iran’s scientists in the past, several of whom have disappeared only to end up in U.S. custody, including one who “resurfaced in the United States after defecting to the CIA in return for a large sum of money”). At the very least, there has been no denunciation from any Obama officials of whoever it might be carrying out such acts.
I actually don’t think we’re behind this. I wouldn’t put it past Obama, but I’m very doubtful. Everyone seem to think it’s Israel and I will admit they’re the most likely candidate. But the Saudis and Iraqis have no interest in a nuclear Iraq. Neither do India or Pakistan.
But I do know that if a Republican were President, the demands for a special investigation would be long and loud. It’s obscene how the Left falls on real or perceived War on Terror excess when it’s their guy doing it.
Curious what you guys think about this, however. Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan was not a terrorist or a military figure; he was a scientist with a family. Is the killing justified? Is it an act of war? Is it an act of terrorism, as Greenwald claims?
Update: More here. I do want to re-iterate what I’ve said before: I think all of this is merely delaying the inevitable. Iran, even if the current regime is toppled, will never accept not being a nuclear power. Not when they’re surrounded by other nuclear powers. Staving off the inevitable isn’t a bad thing — maybe we can push the nuclear day past the Mullahs’ expiration date. But it is still just staving off the inevitable. Iran will be a nuclear power one day. The debate is not about whether we can prevent it but what means we are willing to use to delay that day of reckoning.