June 30th, 2008
02:23 PM ET

If Iran is attacked, should the U.S. or Israel do it?

Balloons in the colors of the Iranian flag read anti-US and anti-Israel slogans as Iranians take part in a rally to mark the 28th anniversary of the Islamic revolution in Tehran. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Time is apparently running out to do something about Iran's nuclear program.

In the latest issue of New Yorker, Sy Hersh reports the U.S. has stepped up covert operations inside that country–everything from spying on Iran's nuclear program to supporting rebel groups opposed to the country's ruling clerics.

Meanwhile, a former head of the Israeli intelligence agency, Mossad, tells London's Sunday Telegraph that Iran may have a nuclear weapon within a year. And he says there's no doubt Iran intends to use it once it gets it. He says the time is getting shorter for Israel to act.

Unlike the U.S., which has spent more than 5 years looking for Osama bin Laden and invading Iraq and not succeeding at either, the Israelis tend not to mess around.

Ask Syria. Last year an Israeli airstrike reportedly targeted a partially built Syrian nuclear reactor. Ask Iraq. In 1981, Israel bombed a nuclear reactor in Baghdad, saying they thought it was making nuclear weapons to destroy Israel.

While the international community, led by President Bush, continues to bluster and sanction and threaten, Iran continues its relentless march toward nuclear weapons.

There's a lot of stuff the civilized world doesn't want to deal with. Iran having nuclear weapons would be somewhere near the very top of the list. Unless they have a change of heart – a la North Korea – it looks more and more like Iran is going all in. And it's going to be up to somebody in the west to decide whether or not to call.

Here’s my question to you: If Iran is attacked, who should do it: the United States or Israel?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


Filed under: Iran • Israel • United State of America
May 5th, 2008
05:52 PM ET

Is America fading?


FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

“Just as the world is opening up, we are closing down."

That's a quote from a terrific Newsweek cover story by Fareed Zakaria called "The Rise of the Rest" that explores what's happening to the United States during this global power shift.

Zakaria examines "The Post-American World" where by almost every measure – from industrial to financial, to social to cultural – the distribution of power is shifting away from the United States. It's a stark change from the superpower status we've had for most of the last century. He talks about the dark mood of many Americans, with more than 80% of the country believing we're on the wrong track.

Zakaria says that this post-American world shouldn't necessarily be an "unsettling prospect for Americans." He says it's the result of a series of positive trends that have welcomed in an international climate of "unprecedented peace and prosperity." He points to economic growth of many countries all around the globe and insists that America is benefiting from these trends of globalization.

Even as the rest of the world continues to rise around us, America remains "the most open, flexible society in the world, able to absorb other people, cultures, ideas, goods and services."

Zakaria says American society can adapt to this new world, but wonders if our government can. He points to our narrow foreign policy and desire to be the global rule-maker but then to not always play by the rules.

Here’s my question to you: Is America fading from its position as the most powerful nation in the world?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?