It just seems like we know where this path is headed. The governments of our two countries are always ratcheting up the rhetoric. We want Iran to get out of the nuclear business because we don't trust them to do the right thing(cover for nuclear arms program). Iran claims it is their right to develop this technology and make their own nuclear fuel for civilian purposes. The thing is...they could easily go to a nuclear arms program(if their not already) in that position. Europe is questioning why the US position is of belief that Iran is doing a nuclear arms program. The US says that Iran is sitting on natural reserves of oil and natural gas so why should they have a need for nuclear technology given all the fuel their sitting on. Europe wants to believe the best obviously...which is Iran is not doing anything wrong. I would state their position as one of being lax...kind of like a "we don't bother you...you don't bother us" attitude. I'm not sure they would even care if Iran was up to no good as Iran is, under their viewpoint, not their real problem or enemy. Yet, they are sworn enemies of the US as everyone knows. So, how long do you feel that our government is going to be willing to bend over and continue taking it from Iran? With Bush and Rice, nothing would surprise me. I don't see Iran doing anything to try and be friendly with the US. But, I don't see the US doing anything either. Aren't we just headed for the inevitable war? After all...if Bush's justification for the Iraq war was Saddam was a threat with WoMD...then can't he apply that same logic to Iran? Does Bush think that, if Iran is successfully hiding their nuclear program(just like Libya did for years I might add), that they might give these weapons to terrorists? I mean...we all know they support terrorism. Under Bush's pro-active doctrine, I wonder if he can go another 4 years without escalating the Iran situation to the brink of war? I guess my opinion is Iran needs to be totally transparent in their nuclear program and they have not been. They have been busted on non-disclosure before. How can you trust these self-appointed clerics who pray for nothing more than "Death to Israel and America" to do the right thing let alone speak truthfully about their program. And, given the Bush doctrine, once the diplomacy fails and runs out...we know what is next. Last, I think the whole thing of nuclear deterrence is one Bush wouldn't apply to Iran just as he wouldn't apply it to Iraq...because he believes that they could hand those weapons over to terrorists who could do the deed unofficially. So, somehow we have gone away from the whole doctrine of mutual deterence because both sides own the bomb because no rules apply to terrorism. I just think it's a matter of time before a war ensues unfortunately. Unless Iran gets their act together(and that doesn't appear to be happening), diplomacy could be headed for the trash can. Europeans appear to be the key here but they apparently seem to be leaning more on the Iranian side at this point. I don't know. I'm just tired of reading about all this crap. It seems like there is a new f-ing article on Iran and their nuclear doings every other day. The bottom line is can Iran be trusted and trusted with a nuclear program? It's clear our answer is a resounding no. But, what are the future prospects for clearing this crap up or, even, being friendly with Iran and re-establishing ties? Sometimes, you just have to sit back and hate the way the world works. Surf
Wake me up when WW3 begins. Oh, and I forgot to add it's within Iran's national sovereignty to further develop it's weapons of mass destructions. Heck, I would extremely advise the people of Iran (notice I said people, instead of government or religious factions) to speed up their development of nuclear weapons to protect their whole country from succumbing to the ilk of our global hegemony. Who wants to die for more oil? Anyone...anyone? I know I'm not manning the front lines, but neither are the people who will advise the people of this country to go to war again. How should the Administration play it this time? WMD, then change to Iran's democracy, then change to their human rights. Or WMD, then their human rights, then for the right of the people of Iran to vote. Or better yet, WMD, then human rights, then voting rights, then finger up my a$$.
Iran will say they can have nuclear weapons because Israel has nuclear weapons (allegedly). If someone does attack Iran, then Iran is going to lob a bunch of missiles into Israel and they will be better then those pathetic Scuds that Saddam had. If it got bad enough in Israel, expect a mushroom cloud over Tehran, probably from those alleged Israeli nukes. I expect nothing to happen anytime soon, except more rhetoric from each side. The threat of a nuke falling into terrorists hands is just as great from a souce like North Korea, Pakistan or Russia.
Certainly most of this is purely rhetoric, but if Israel/ US feels certain that Iran is ready to make a major step towards completing a nuke then the air strikes will begin. Iran will not be allowed to have nuclear weapons ~ this unfortunately is an easy decision. ________________________ Iran Would Accelerate Nuke Program if Attacked TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran would both retaliate and accelerate its drive to master nuclear technology if the United States or Israel attacked its atomic facilities, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator warned on Sunday. Asked about a possible attack by the United States or Israel, which have both said a nuclear-armed Iran would be unacceptable, Rohani said: "If such an attack (against Iran's atomic facilities) takes place then of course we will retaliate and we will definitely accelerate our activities to complete our (nuclear) fuel cycle." Speaking in a rare interview, Rohani said Iran's ability to produce its own nuclear parts had made it "invulnerable" to attack since it could simply rebuild whatever was destroyed. "But I do not think the United States itself will take such a risk ... They know our capabilities for retaliating against such attacks," the mid-ranking cleric added. Iran has ballistic missiles which can hit Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf and has vowed to retaliate strongly should either country try to repeat Israel's 1981 successful bombing of Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor. EU diplomats have voiced frustration at Iran's refusal to give way on what it calls its "red line" -- developing a full nuclear fuel cycle -- saying Tehran's stance is "unacceptable." Rohani complained the EU talks, due to resume in Geneva this week, have yet to result in anything concrete thus far. "Our expectations were higher. We believe the Europeans should be more serious," he said. full article
The US's role in this diplomacy is to be the insane snarling bad cop to Europe's good cop. Frankly though if I were the Iranian Ayatollahs, I would go right ahead with development. Keeping the West as a perceived threat binds Islamic peoples against a common enemy. And nothing keeps a lid on dissent and cowers common people to autocratic power like the threat of war. It makes dissent unpatriotic and in Iran, against religeon, a double whammy. I don't think any Western leader would actually propose invading Iran. It would be suicide militarily and economically. No junkie is ever going to kill his dealer.
If Iran is getting close to having nukes, all we will have to do is sit back and watch. There is no way that Isreal allows Iran to obtain nuclear weapons.
Question: If Isreal DOES have the bomb. . .should we invade them as well? Should we DEMAND they dismantle them? Rocket River
Perhaps b/c Israeal hasn't shown itself to be a threat to its neighbors akin to NKorea et. al.....same reason we don't invade france, GB, etc..
Lots of chatter about this lately... ___________________ U.S. Says Iran Atom Bomb Years Away, Tehran Defiant WASHINGTON/TEHRAN (Reuters) - The United States on Sunday played down any suggestion of attacking Iran, which it said may be years from making an atomic bomb, but Tehran vowed to press on with a nuclear program it insists is peaceful. Vice President Dick Cheney, who last month warned that Israel might attack Iran's atomic facilities -- as it attacked a reactor in Saddam Hussein's Iraq in 1981 -- said he backed EU-Iran nuclear talks due to be held on Tuesday. "It's fairly clear from the public statements of the Iranians ... that they are on a path of seeking a nuclear weapon and don't have it at the present time," Rumsfeld said in a taped interview with CNN's "Late Edition." Rumsfeld, whose country led the 2003 invasion of Iraq on the basis of what proved to be false reports that Baghdad possesses banned weapons, was cautious about the accuracy of intelligence estimates on Iran's nuclear program. "... they're some years away according to the estimates, but I don't know if the estimates are correct or not," he said. "The president handles Iran policy, he's decided on a diplomatic route." But Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Hassan Rohani, cast a shadow over the impending talks with European states, telling Reuters the West could offer nothing that would persuade it to scrap its nuclear program. Iran says the program will be used to generate electricity, not make bombs. Washington says Tehran is using a civilian program as a front for weapons development. Rohani said Iran would review progress in the talks in mid-March before taking any decision on whether to resume uranium enrichment, which it froze in November. But Rohani said even the removal of U.S. sanctions on Iran or security guarantees from Washington could not tempt it to give up its nuclear drive. "Uranium enrichment is Iran's right, based on the NPT's (nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty's) article four ... I do not think anyone in Iran would exchange or swap this right for anything else." And he told Reuters that if the United States or Israel attacked its atomic facilities, "then of course we will retaliate and we will definitely accelerate our activities to complete our (nuclear) fuel cycle." full article
honestly the short and simple answer is . . *WE* like isreal and trust them cause they more like US whereas those others . . they don't like us and they not so much like us . .. so we will bomb them if they think about getting the bomb School Yard Diplomacy Rocket River
Consider that it was France that gave Israel the bomb, not the US. Now France doesn't want Iran to have the bomb. Whose diplomacy are we talking about.
from what I hear, we're already playing chicken with them, flying overhead and daring them to turn on their air search radars, so we can map their defenses you know... just in case
