Iran ramping up nuclear activities

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207195,00.html

 

 

Next step is to kick out the IAEA inspectors ( I give em about a month before that happens ) and withdraw from the NPT.

 

 

Is anyone still nieve enough to think diplomacy is gonna work on Ahmenenajad & these guys?

[samclemens]

well, its a good thing the UN passed another resolution condemning this. how many times have they extended this deadline now?

 

the UN is the most worthless organization in the world.

[Balta1701]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207195,00.html

Next step is to kick out the IAEA inspectors ( I give em about a month before that happens ) and withdraw from the NPT.

Is anyone still nieve enough to think diplomacy is gonna work on Ahmenenajad & these guys?

See, here's the thing though...if Ahmadinejad actually does do exactly what you say he's going to do...then when we do wind up having to strike them, we will be doing so with at least a few allies behind it. Why? Because we've done this the right way. We have plenty of time, we still have years before they succeed at anything, and we've avoided making ourselves into the bad guy, just by taking our time. You can say the U.N. is as useless as you want, doesn't make it true.

[samclemens]

See, here's the thing though...if Ahmadinejad actually does do exactly what you say he's going to do...then when we do wind up having to strike them, we will be doing so with at least a few allies behind it. Why? Because we've done this the right way. We have plenty of time, we still have years before they succeed at anything, and we've avoided making ourselves into the bad guy, just by taking our time. You can say the U.N. is as useless as you want, doesn't make it true.

 

the current islamofacists in power in iran are impossible to predict, except for their support of anyone and anything anti-israel. thats why I have to disagree with you when you say that we have "plenty of time". iran is openly defying UN resolutions like its their job. and what has the UN done? issue a couple resolutions and extend iran's deadlines. when the UN actually does something besides demand ceasefires and (especially maddening) even suggest that hezbollah should not be defined as a terrorist organization, i will give them credit.

 

i guess i would ask you why you consider the UN an effective organization. I just dont see it.

[Rex Kickass]

the current islamofacists in power in iran are impossible to predict

 

That's spoken like someone who's political research comes exclusively from talk radio. There are literally hundreds of people who study this that would disagree with you.

 

Are there options that might end Iran's nuclear capability? Yes. Most of them are relatively unpalatable for the US and they range from eating crow to full out war. None of them are the easy thing to do - and none of them are things that the US may see as a short term interest.

 

But what the Iranians are doing is entirely predictable. They see one thing as abundantly clear. The US is not in a position to invade Iran at the moment, and by going nuclear, Iran will be in a position to never actually be in a position to be under the threat of US invasion. Going nuclear is their seat at the table. The sooner people in our government really understand this, the better chance we have to stop it.

[Balta1701]

That's spoken like someone who's political research comes exclusively from talk radio. There are literally hundreds of people who study this that would disagree with you.

"I don't trust books. They're all fact, no heart."

 

Seriously though, there's a motive for thought like that. Once a person decides that a priori American Military power can do anything, and is totally unstoppable in all fronts, and combines that with the belief that anyone who opposes America is pure evil (either with us or against us), then it makes sense to try to take every action done by Iran and use it as a reason for an immediate military strike, and then to belittle anyone who slows you down or asks for restraint. It's the exact formula that we used, say, 3.5 years ago.

[minors]

the current islamofacists in power in iran are impossible to predict, except for their support of anyone and anything anti-israel. thats why I have to disagree with you when you say that we have "plenty of time". iran is openly defying UN resolutions like its their job. and what has the UN done? issue a couple resolutions and extend iran's deadlines. when the UN actually does something besides demand ceasefires and (especially maddening) even suggest that hezbollah should not be defined as a terrorist organization, i will give them credit.

 

i guess i would ask you why you consider the UN an effective organization. I just dont see it.

 

The UN is not an effective organization because they are weak. Iran could keep building weapons and the UN would say "OK just don't build anymore" And the security council to vote for intervention would take a country being destroyed. That is why they are useless.

[Heads22]

The UN is not an effective organization because they are weak. Iran could keep building weapons and the UN would say "OK just don't build anymore" And the security council to vote for intervention would take a country being destroyed. That is why they are useless.

 

 

Well, that and we just won't listen to them.

[minors]

Well, that and we just won't listen to them.

 

 

Because they are so weak. Iraq would have had to committ a 9/11 style attack for them to have done anything and then it would have been some stupid warning again. As far as I am concerned we don't need the UN

[Rex Kickass]

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

Maybe part of the reason UN leadership is weak rests with weak leadership at home. And in a handful of other countries that control what the UN does.

[minors]

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

Maybe part of the reason UN leadership is weak rests with weak leadership at home. And in a handful of other countries that control what the UN does.

 

So why did we have to fight tooth and nail to go into Iraq.

[southsider2k5]

the current islamofacists in power in iran are impossible to predict, except for their support of anyone and anything anti-israel. thats why I have to disagree with you when you say that we have "plenty of time". iran is openly defying UN resolutions like its their job. and what has the UN done? issue a couple resolutions and extend iran's deadlines. when the UN actually does something besides demand ceasefires and (especially maddening) even suggest that hezbollah should not be defined as a terrorist organization, i will give them credit.

 

i guess i would ask you why you consider the UN an effective organization. I just dont see it.

 

Impossible to predict? Not at all. They have actually been very predicatble, just none of it is good for our world view.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

The UN does nothing without US approval.

 

Maybe part of the reason UN leadership is weak rests with weak leadership at home. And in a handful of other countries that control what the UN does.

 

That's a little misleading as their are 5 countries that can derail anything for any reason. Its true, but definately not all-inclusive.

[samclemens]

not one of you critics responding to my post adressed my comments on the UN (the main point of the post).

 

what you all are advocating is a foolish way to go about things. a literal madman running iran is "easily predictable" and "very predictable". just take a step back and say it out loud. we all know the old saying that describes what happens when we assume.

 

you all can say with a straight face iran wont attack israel tomorrow for sure? that they wouldnt give terrorists nuclear weapons if they developed them (and no one knows how close they are)?

 

well, apparently we have nothing to worry about, since one of the most dangerous juntas currently in power is "easily" and "very" predictable. phew, i was actually worried about islamofacist dictators for a minute there!

[Balta1701]

you all can say with a straight face iran wont attack israel tomorrow for sure? that they wouldnt give terrorists nuclear weapons if they developed them (and no one knows how close they are)?

Actually, while no one knows Exactly how close they are, plenty of people have very very good guesses, and all of those guesses say around 10 years.

[Cknolls]

Actually, while no one knows Exactly how close they are, plenty of people have very very good guesses, and all of those guesses say around 10 years.

 

 

I'll take the under if they are left unchecked. Also, lets keep in mind other sources of nuclear materiel, i.e.:

 

N. Korea.

[samclemens]

Actually, while no one knows Exactly how close they are, plenty of people have very very good guesses, and all of those guesses say around 10 years.

 

they are in contact with north korea as we speak. you cant say definitively that we have at least 10 years before iran does something nuclear and something horrible. its making huge assumptions that could lead to devastating opportunities for iran and/or north korea.

[Balta1701]

I'll take the under if they are left unchecked. Also, lets keep in mind other sources of nuclear materiel, i.e.:

 

N. Korea.

But here's the problem...if North Korea were to actually ship Iran a bomb or two, what exactly is there that we can do about it? We can't bomb the Hell out of Korea, because South Korea and Tokyo will cease to exist. We can't bomb Iran to tell them not to buy things from Korea, because all that us striking them will do is strengthen their government and give them even more reason to deal rapidly with the Koreans. And 2/3 of the U.S. army is currently not in any way, shape, or form ready for deployment, with a decent chunk of the rest tied up in Iraq.

[samclemens]

But here's the problem...if North Korea were to actually ship Iran a bomb or two, what exactly is there that we can do about it? We can't bomb the Hell out of Korea, because South Korea and Tokyo will cease to exist. We can't bomb Iran to tell them not to buy things from Korea, because all that us striking them will do is strengthen their government and give them even more reason to deal rapidly with the Koreans. And 2/3 of the U.S. army is currently not in any way, shape, or form ready for deployment, with a decent chunk of the rest tied up in Iraq.

 

you are pretty much right, I think. but the israelis could do it, thats what i am hoping for. they certainly have the justification in my opinion.

[southsideirish71]

But here's the problem...if North Korea were to actually ship Iran a bomb or two, what exactly is there that we can do about it? We can't bomb the Hell out of Korea, because South Korea and Tokyo will cease to exist. We can't bomb Iran to tell them not to buy things from Korea, because all that us striking them will do is strengthen their government and give them even more reason to deal rapidly with the Koreans. And 2/3 of the U.S. army is currently not in any way, shape, or form ready for deployment, with a decent chunk of the rest tied up in Iraq.

 

If Israel even so as sniffs Iran getting a bomb or thinks its near, Tehran will glow in the dark for the next 1000 years.

[Balta1701]

you are pretty much right, I think. but the israelis could do it, thats what i am hoping for. they certainly have the justification in my opinion.

They're about the only one for whom the strike would even be remotely possible, since having the U.S. do it via airstrikes would probably cause the downfall of the U.S. in Iraq, and lord knows how many casualties. It's entirely possible that Israel attacking Iran would cause it as well, but at least in that case it's not 99% like it is with the U.S.

 

The problem of course is that an Osirak type attack doesn't work with Iran, because what we do know about their facilities is that they are spread out and hardened to either prevent or at least prolongue such an attack to a length that would really threaten the operation. And I'm not totally sure, but I think Iran's air defense system is at least capable of doing some damage, unless it's hit with something as strong as a full scale U.S. assault. And beyond that, if you guys are worried about Korea shipping things to Iran...having Israel attack Iran does nothing to prevent that, and in fact might even encourage it.

[Cknolls]

But here's the problem...if North Korea were to actually ship Iran a bomb or two, what exactly is there that we can do about it? We can't bomb the Hell out of Korea, because South Korea and Tokyo will cease to exist. We can't bomb Iran to tell them not to buy things from Korea, because all that us striking them will do is strengthen their government and give them even more reason to deal rapidly with the Koreans. And 2/3 of the U.S. army is currently not in any way, shape, or form ready for deployment, with a decent chunk of the rest tied up in Iraq.

 

I agree. I'm just taking the under of 10 years.

[Balta1701]

I agree. I'm just taking the under of 10 years.

Even if you take the under...that still gives us quite a few years to, if nothing else, rebuild our armed forces before we have to make a decision that all diplomacy has failed.

[AbeFroman]

Is anyone still nieve enough to think diplomacy is gonna work on Ahmenenajad & these guys?

 

No... nobody is naive enough to think they are just going to stop on their own.

 

But the bigger problem is that the US is unable to launch the type of full scale assault necessary to deter Iran (and other nations in the future) from building these weapons. If we were not bogged down in Iraq (chasing WMD that don't actually exist), we could be going after the one we KNOW are building nuclear weapons.

 

Yet by the perverse logic of the present administration, we have invaded, occupied, and spent billions on the one nation of the "axis of evil" that was least likely to develop nukes.

 

Nothing can be done about North Korea... that cat is out of the bag... but we could have been able to stop Iran. Now our vast military infrastructure (along with most of our military's intellectual and manpower resources) are committed to the near impossible task of preventing civil war in a country we didn't need to invade in the first place.

 

Its shockingly stupid

[kapkomet]

We *COULD* do something about it, but the left in this country couldn't stomach it. That's why we have to have all the diplomacy in the world that will lead to the same thing, and that's a nutcase regime with a nuclear weapon - more nutcase then North Korea.

[Balta1701]

We *COULD* do something about it, but the right in this country typed q instead of n in all of their columns.

Fixed that for you.

Edited August 7, 2006 by Balta1701