What is right and what is wrong? Seemingly an easy question, but in reality is quite difficult. For the answer is too often predicated upon one’s ambitions and personal preferences.
The knee-jerk reaction to the proposed Iran Deal by Republicans might in fact be righteous, but when heated acrimonious rejection occurs prior to reading the document, then other motivations must be considered.
When absolute rejection is accompanied by no alternatives other than to demand changes which would never be agreed upon by Iran, diplomatic avenues to resolve the issue have been discarded.
Iraq was a waste of American and Iraqi lives and to our treasury. Those who served proudly demand our respect and thanks. Those who sent them on false premises and acclamations should receive our scorn.
The very ones who cavalierly sent our armed forces to Iraq are the same who offer nothing for the Iran issue but eventual boots on the ground.
Perhaps it should be required that those who vote for war must have a child serve their country in the heat of battle. It would cause a closer examination of why those with the power insist on arms versus diplomacy to settle conflicts.
Perhaps then what is right would dominate the self-serving political gamesmanship that has defined Washington.