[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 10]
[House]
[Page 13709]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      IS DIPLOMACY MORE DANGEROUS?

  (Mr. KUCINICH asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. KUCINICH. Yesterday, the value of shares on the Lisbon stock 
market dropped amid rumors of a military attack on Iran's nuclear 
research facilities.
  The Bush administration has been mindlessly threatening the use of 
nuclear bunker busters on Iranian nuclear facilities. The Physicians 
for Social Responsibility have analyzed the effect of such an attack: 
``Within 48 hours, fallout would cover much of Iran, most of 
Afghanistan, and spread into Pakistan and India. Fallout from the use 
of a burrowing weapon such as the B61-11 would be worse than from a 
surface or air-burst weapon due to the extra radioactive dust and 
debris ejected from the blast site. In the immediate area of the two 
attacks, our calculations show that, within 48 hours, an estimated 2.6 
million people would die; over 10.5 million people would be exposed to 
significant radiation from fallout.''
  Do we really believe the best way to deal with Iran's nuclear 
facilities is to blow them up? Where are our spiritual values? our 
moral sensibilities? Is diplomacy more dangerous?

                          ____________________