So now what?

[southsider2k5]

Drudge reporting Iran will not negotiate with US over nuclear program

 

So now what do we do?

[kapkomet]

They have no reason to. Hello, WWIII, sometime in our generation.

[NorthSideSox72]

Some would say we are headed back onto Nostradamus' track.

[southsideirish71]

Boom goes Tehran......

[Gregory Pratt]

Oh my, s*** is going to hit the fan.

[AbeFroman]

I don't mean to start another debate on the merits of the war in Iraq, but it now feels like we've wasted the our military and political capital on invading Iraq when military options in Iran might need to be pursued.

 

I think its really dangerous to let Iran have nuclear technology. Not only is Isreal in direct reach of Iranian missle range, Iran is just goofy enough to start pawning off its technology to groups that actually might strike the U.S. They seem 10 times more likely to hit us (or our allies) than Iraq ever did.

 

Now if just feels inevitable. Iran will have nukes. Scary.

[KipWellsFan]

I don't mean to start another debate on the merits of the war in Iraq, but it now feels like we've wasted the our military and political capital on invading Iraq when military options in Iran might need to be pursued.

 

I think its really dangerous to let Iran have nuclear technology. Not only is Isreal in direct reach of Iranian missle range, Iran is just goofy enough to start pawning off its technology to groups that actually might strike the U.S. They seem 10 times more likely to hit us (or our allies) than Iraq ever did.

 

Now if just feels inevitable. Iran will have nukes. Scary.

 

Not to mention Bob Baer thinks Aminejad might have had direct links with the 9/11 bombers.

[NorthSideSox72]

Not to mention Bob Baer thinks Aminejad might have had direct links with the 9/11 bombers.

I would definitely agree, from what I have seen and read, that Iran had a heck of a lot more connection to 9/11 than Iraq did.

 

 

I don't mean to start another debate on the merits of the war in Iraq, but it now feels like we've wasted the our military and political capital on invading Iraq when military options in Iran might need to be pursued.

 

I think its really dangerous to let Iran have nuclear technology. Not only is Isreal in direct reach of Iranian missle range, Iran is just goofy enough to start pawning off its technology to groups that actually might strike the U.S. They seem 10 times more likely to hit us (or our allies) than Iraq ever did.

 

Now if just feels inevitable. Iran will have nukes. Scary.

I'd agree with this too.

[WCSox]

I was optmistic that they might just be using their nuke program as a bargaining chip, but that looks less likely now. :headshake

 

If military action is imposed, I really, really hope that the UN is heavily involved. If not, it very well may be the end of our relationship with them.

[southsider2k5]

This isn't North Korea we are dealing with, and to think that these people are bent on anything short of the destruction of Israel and/or the USA is a gross underestimation in my opinion.

 

I knew this wasn't going to go away as soon as Iran shot down Russias proposal to give them fuel rods on the condition that it took posession of them after they were used as to not allow them to be further refined into weapons grade material.

[southsideirish71]

I don't mean to start another debate on the merits of the war in Iraq, but it now feels like we've wasted the our military and political capital on invading Iraq when military options in Iran might need to be pursued.

 

I think its really dangerous to let Iran have nuclear technology. Not only is Isreal in direct reach of Iranian missle range, Iran is just goofy enough to start pawning off its technology to groups that actually might strike the U.S. They seem 10 times more likely to hit us (or our allies) than Iraq ever did.

 

Now if just feels inevitable. Iran will have nukes. Scary.

 

 

Iran will have nukes for about as long as it takes Israel to obliterate their country. They will nuke them back to the stone age before they let that crazy country get nukes.

 

I hope they are building bomb shelters in Tehran. Because the big nasty is going to come down, suck the paint off all of their houses, and give them a permanent green hairdo.

[Kid Gleason]

Iran will have nukes for about as long as it takes Israel to obliterate their country. They will nuke them back to the stone age before they let that crazy country get nukes.

 

I hope they are building bomb shelters in Tehran. Because the big nasty is going to come down, suck the paint off all of their houses, and give them a permanent green hairdo.

 

Promise?

[Rex Kickass]

They still are using it as a bargaining chip. The language used seems to suggest that Iran is no longer interested in talking with the US over such matters. It doesn't mean that Iran is giving the rest of the world community the cold shoulder.

[WCSox]

I hope they are building bomb shelters in Tehran. Because the big nasty is going to come down, suck the paint off all of their houses, and give them a permanent green hairdo.

 

I thought it was a permanent orange afro?

 

I hope that the UN will get involved, rather than Israel. Israel attacking Iran (even when justified) would create a HUGE mess in the Middle East.

[vandy125]

They still are using it as a bargaining chip. The language used seems to suggest that Iran is no longer interested in talking with the US over such matters. It doesn't mean that Iran is giving the rest of the world community the cold shoulder.

 

That was my optimistic take on this too. They do not want to deal with the US on this. Is that really all that surprising? I am hoping that they will make a deal with someone to stop this, but the pessimistic side of says that it is not realistic. I have a feeling that they are just going to keep dragging their feet, playing the waiting game to see if someone will actually take a step to stop them.

 

To me, all I have seen so far is talking and posturing but no real action, and I think Iran will keep on doing what they are as long as that remains the status quo.

[Rex Kickass]

Southsider, North Korea and Iran have the same game. My feeling is that Iran is working for nukes in a purely defensive measure. By all accounts, there will most likely be a semi-permanent US presence in the Middle East, and Iran feels threatened by it.

[southsider2k5]

Southsider, North Korea and Iran have the same game. My feeling is that Iran is working for nukes in a purely defensive measure. By all accounts, there will most likely be a semi-permanent US presence in the Middle East, and Iran feels threatened by it.

 

Just judging by recent history, I completely disagree with you. I think NK is playing a game with us, while there isn't a doubt in my mind that Iran has offensive purposes up its sleeve and that is why they are pursuing nuclear technology.

[Rex Kickass]

What in IROIran's 26 year history would lead you to believe that Iran is acting in any offensive capacity as a state. Have they funded terror organizations to further their policy goals? Yes. But going nuclear - or providing similar technology as a state to NGO terror groups is a big jump from paying for bombs and mortar shells. It's also the end of the state's existence - and I'm sure that the people in charge in Iran realize that - and won't use their technology so recklessly. The game is as much in play for the people who run Iran as it is for the people who run North Korea.

[southsider2k5]

What in IROIran's 26 year history would lead you to believe that Iran is acting in any offensive capacity as a state. Have they funded terror organizations to further their policy goals? Yes. But going nuclear - or providing similar technology as a state to NGO terror groups is a big jump from paying for bombs and mortar shells. It's also the end of the state's existence - and I'm sure that the people in charge in Iran realize that - and won't use their technology so recklessly. The game is as much in play for the people who run Iran as it is for the people who run North Korea.

 

They have a near 40 year history of trying to obtain nuclear technology on the underground market, and through their own research. They are also on record as calling for the distruction of Israel, which has been reiterated by the current President. He is also on record as saying it is his goal to extent the Islamic revolution around the world, and not just the middle east or Israel. Ahmadinejad has also been connected to the kidnapping of the American's in 1980. Its also been said that Ahmadinejad believes that it is his duty in life to hasten the return of Mahdi, and that he is to do whatever he can to aid in those things that must occur before Madhi can return. The big one is the destruction of Israel.

 

To me Il is just a power hungry nut-job who wants his little kingdom and to be left alone. Ahmadinejad is a man who KNOWS that it is his mission in life to aid in the coming judgement of mankind. Yes I fully believe he wants nuclear technology to destroy the US and Israel, but mostly Israel.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

They still are using it as a bargaining chip. The language used seems to suggest that Iran is no longer interested in talking with the US over such matters. It doesn't mean that Iran is giving the rest of the world community the cold shoulder.

 

 

How naive are you? Its patently obvious that they are stringing along the world community with this fake diplomacy while they go full bore with their crash program to develop the bomb. They need to be attacked by Isreal or the US or a combination of the 2 and its gotta happen before its too late.

[Rex Kickass]

They have a near 40 year history of trying to obtain nuclear technology on the underground market, and through their own research.

 

This is completely false. The current regime in Iran took root in 1979 - 27 years ago. Iran's government spent the bulk of its first 9 years fighting Iraq.

 

They are also on record as calling for the distruction of Israel, which has been reiterated by the current President. He is also on record as saying it is his goal to extent the Islamic revolution around the world, and not just the middle east or Israel. Ahmadinejad has also been connected to the kidnapping of the American's in 1980. Its also been said that Ahmadinejad believes that it is his duty in life to hasten the return of Mahdi, and that he is to do whatever he can to aid in those things that must occur before Madhi can return. The big one is the destruction of Israel.

 

This is true. However, it should be stated that the President of Iran has relatively little power. If that were the case, perhaps the reformers who tried to change Iran in the late 90's and early 00's would still be in power. Yet they aren't. The actual supreme leaders of Iran seem to have been fairly consistent and far more pragmatic in their actual actions. Iran's chief foreign policy aim at this point would be more akin to expanding its in sphere of influence to work on getting an allied Iraq. Something it's actually being quite successful in doing. It's years away from being able to be offensive towards other major powers - and its something that this government isn't too likely to do anyway. Simply because the level of dissent would increase as their power grows.

 

To me Il is just a power hungry nut-job who wants his little kingdom and to be left alone. Ahmadinejad is a man who KNOWS that it is his mission in life to aid in the coming judgement of mankind. Yes I fully believe he wants nuclear technology to destroy the US and Israel, but mostly Israel.

 

The man you fear would never have his hand on the button.

[kapkomet]

Come on Rex. 27 years, 40 years... it's not that much of a difference. Ever since 1979, perhaps even a little before, they've wanted this technology. Let's not argue semantics.

[Rex Kickass]

I don't usually, but that bothers me because I hear it all the time and its more than 10 years off reality.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Come on Rex. 27 years, 40 years... it's not that much of a difference. Ever since 1979, perhaps even a little before, they've wanted this technology. Let's not argue semantics.

The thing is about the Islamic fundie government there -- between the radical fundies and the US/CIA supported Shah, they did a damn good job at wiping out lots of moderates who were saying "We don't like the Shah or fundie government." (The Shah was imprisoning people who didn't agree with him and the mullahs wanted a stringent fundie government)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution

 

A lot of the history was involvement of foreign powers dictating what government the people could or couldn't have. God forbid they're a bit angry about having English/American fingerprints all over keeping the Shah in power and assistance in the "liquidations" that helped Khomeini get power during the Cold War.

 

In the late 90s, many normal Iranians wanted to become more liberalized (i.e. see the reformist president that preceeded Ahmadinanutjob) Unfortunately for him, the traditionalist religious fundie nuts that grew such a stronghold (hey, thanks CIA! ) stuck their heels in and fought him the whole way. So, it led to A: not as many of his aims being achieved as fast as the people wanted them and B: the fear of Joe Q. Iranian getting killed as collateral damage in a potential US attack.

 

Just like Americans felt "We want to be safe from somebody that's going to kick our ass!", the Iranian public felt that and swung to the fundie conservative Ahmadif***wit. Khatami (the previous leader) was quite into a "dialogue across civilizations" and blunting the hardline agenda as much as he could. Yet the response he got was being added into the "Axis of Evil" which helped to blunt any effective dialogue between the US and Iran leaders.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Khatami

 

So I wouldn't say that they've been going gung ho since 1979. Iran's fundie leaders are indeed really out there with conservative nationalist ideas, supporting fundie Muslims that accessorize with dynamite but it isn't all just "Iran = BAD!" There's a lot more of a gray area here than people like to think about.

[Gregory Pratt]

Come on Rex. 27 years, 40 years... it's not that much of a difference. Ever since 1979, perhaps even a little before, they've wanted this technology. Let's not argue semantics.

 

It is absolutely a large difference, especially when you consider that Iran went just short of a decade at war with Iran. 27 years and forty -- huge gap there, and then subtract nine from twenty seven, and you've got a lot less years to pursue nuclear weapons -- weapons that take years -- and it gives a very different view of the situation. It's important to have a genuine timeframe here, Kap.

 

Personally, I think some sort of action has to be taken, but the Iranians are still a ways off of their nukes, and I think it's important to keep that in perspective.