It bothers me that the terrorists are killing some of the “key” Iranian scientists, and not the rest of them, and I am sorry that this is a “question blog” and not an “answer blog,” meaning I have more questions than answers for you. Well, come to think about it, I don’t think I have any answers at all, just some things that bug me. For instance, I know we don’t know the full extent of Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan’s involvement in the Iranian nuclear development program, or a clandestine nuclear bomb making program, if you’d like to call it that, and heck, I don’t like nuclear bombs either, but what if this Roshan guy turns out to be somebody like Shahram Amiri. Wasn’t he supposed to be some kind of nuclear scientist but it turned out that he didn’t know much, and that’s why they let him go, otherwise they would have killed him too. What if Roshan was like Shahram Amiri? Wouldn’t killing Roshan, if he didn’t know much, be some kind of a violation against some kind of a law, or something?
Come to think about it, what if he WAS a top notch nuclear BOMB making scientist, and he was working on developing a nuclear bomb, and he could have done it in three more weeks, but in one more week after his assassination he would have said, ‘Nuh, I don’t care how evil the Zionists are, I quit, I ain’t gonna do this anymore. I have a little kid, I want him to grow up in a peaceful world, so from now on I’m gonna dedicate my life to peace and prosperity.’ Don’t we have people like that already in this world? Wasn’t what’s-his-name like that? Yeah, Joseph Rotblat, he was like that. “He was the only scientist to resign from the Manhattan Project and later received the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to rid the world of atomic weapons.” What if Roshan would have become someone like Rotblat, wouldn’t that be a shame! Or, what about Mordechai Vanunu? He was a Israeli nuclear technician, not even a scientist, who changed his mind and completely went against weapons of mass destruction. And there was another one, I remember him from my college days, there was a nuclear scientist who had gone against nuclear power plants and he testified as expert witness in court trials against anti-nuclear protesters. I can’t remember his name, but anyway, you know what I mean.
But that was not my point to begin with, my point is, why not assassin more people, I don’t mean just the scientists, assassin ordinary people, people like the truck driver who delivers parts, nuts and bolts, to the nuclear facilities, and make it be known why the guy was assassinated.
‘This guy was involved with the Iranian regime’s nuclear development program, a clear danger to the world, so he was eliminated.’
And, the guy who cleans the restrooms, the janitor guy, Karim or whatever his name is, kill him too, after all he is involved with clean-up of a nuclear site. Well, hundreds, thousands, should be assassinated, to make the point, that if anyone, in any shape or form, if any Iranians help with the regime’s nuclear ambitions, they are a fair target, that way the whole enterprise would come to screeching halt.
‘Because, it is not practical to kill so many people to prevent this thing from happening.’
Well, I’ll be darned! Isn’t the whole purpose of a nuclear bomb is to kill thousands of people to eliminate the people who aid and abet the enemy. Why not do it now. Kill the people now, so they don’t get to that point when you have to drop nuclear bombs on their heads to prevent them from winning a war against you.
‘We haven’t reached that point yet. At this time, all is needed is elimination of a few key scientists. If things escalate and the regime does not come to its senses, we have to take more drastic measures.’
‘Like, we might have to kill you too. You are aiding and abetting the enemy.’