Huffpo: "shouldn't we be considering preemptive military action against Israel instead?"

I'm sure the author, Cenk Uygur, speaks for a lot of leftists:

Are there no bounds to hypocrisy? The Times is reporting that Israel is seriously considering using nuclear weapons against Iran so that Iran does not threaten the world with nuclear weapons. That would break all irony records.

If Iran is at best two years away from developing a nuclear weapon and they say they have no intention of even building one, let alone using it against anybody and Israel says they are planning to use one against Iran, shouldn't we be considering preemptive military action against Israel instead?

We claim that we care about non-proliferation. We claim that we care about the use of weapons of mass destruction. Then shouldn't our top priority be to stop Israel?

Or could it be that we are wildly hypocritical and don't give a damn about weapons of mass destruction as long as it is our friends who use them? Remember we didn't mind at all when Saddam Hussein used WMD against Iran, because at the time he was on our side.

If we condone Israel using a nuclear weapon against a Muslim country, then we will not have a "war on terror" anymore, we will have the war against Islam that some of the conservative nut-jobs in this country have been hoping and pushing for. Do you know that there are one billion Muslims in the world? One billion. [...]

See the comments thread for the usual attempts to deny that Ahmadinejad spoke of "wiping Israel off the map" or even that he denies the Holocaust ("Ahmadijenad didn't say the Holocaust didn't happen, but that if it did then why didn't Europeans cede territory for the creation of Israel, rather than forcing it on the Palestinians."). Is Israel going to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran using nuclear bunker-busters? I doubt it. The "bunker buster" idea has not worked very well so far with conventional weapons.

Tags: Huffpo, Iran, Israel, leftists, nukes