Guardian’s future history on Iran bombing
Timothy Garton Ash has what is in many ways a rather tendentious future history on “what happened” after President Hillary Clinton bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2009, having won an election by demonstrating that she was tougher than Jeb Bush and/or John McCain:
I tend to agree with those who doubt very much that Clinton will ever be chosen as a Democratic presidential candidate, much less get elected. (I doubt Barack Obama will either, for that matter.) Still, the notion that it will lead to a possibly catastrophic terrorist backlash isn’t too far-fetched - it will only take a few people to carry off such an operation, after all. And the UK cannot afford a dirty bombing in London. If it hits a major tourist area, it stands a serious chance of making that part of town inaccessible for decades, with a huge knock-on as tourists stay away, and if they are not coming to London then many of them will not be coming at all. It’s notable that Blair is now not ruling out participating (there’s a surprise), and unlike Bush, is not up for election for up to four years.
Possibly Related Posts: