How high are the stakes? Iran Sanctions (middle east, Taliban, Pelosi)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't disagree with your points. But ... we are not in the same position to invade anybody as we were before. All our military resources are tied up. I think they understand we don't/can't engage them without throwing our current Iraq/Afghanistan strategies completely out the window.
Also let's say you do get to depose the President. Then what?? You have to ask the questions nobody asked before getting rid of Saddam. Are we going to try to occupy and manage both Iraq and Iran simultaneously?
Do we really want to continue pushing the stakes and antagonizing Russia/China through Iran? How do we come out the winners of that again? What do you think the "Coalition of the Willing" would look like this time around?
I am not arguing with you one way or the other.........my musings concerning Iran were more rhetorical than anything else.
"I have not received any information that there is a concrete active nuclear-weapons program going on right now," IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei asserted in an interview Oct. 31 with CNN.
"There is no smoking-gun proof of work on a nuclear weapon, but there is enough evidence that points in that direction," said Mark Fitzpatrick of the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies, a former deputy assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation controls.
Last edited by ontheroad; 12-06-2007 at 07:55 PM..
Reason: snipped for copyright violation.
I don't see military action as imenent as they are still years away from developing a nuclear weapon and have no interballistic capability. More irritating and actually more deadly at the moment is their support for terrorism in Palestine and Iraq.
I think the strategy (in spite of the foaming at the mouth "Bush it taking over the world" guys), with the rhetoric and sanctions, is to wait them out for another few years because, simply it makes strategic sense to wait them out - see if they moderate, which is a good possibility. Iran does have an opposition party and some moderates, struggling, but it's there. If they don't and get closer to their nuclear goals then I have no doubt we will be sending in bomber strikes (no, not an invasion) and the next president, Hillary or whoever, will be giving that order.
Israel no doubt will want to get to them earlier, but I don't think there bombers have the range and the U.S. will do everything they can to discourage this action.
Good info here. I thought someone else pointed out that the IAEA Director is not in alignment with evidence about a nuclear weapons program, but perhaps I imagined it.
It often amazes me that with all the oversight, and oversight agencies we have in place, nationally and internationally, Intel gets as twisted as a pretzel in summer weather in CP.
"I have not received any information that there is a concrete active nuclear-weapons program going on right now," IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei asserted in an interview Oct. 31 with CNN.
"There is no smoking-gun proof of work on a nuclear weapon, but there is enough evidence that points in that direction," said Mark Fitzpatrick of the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies, a former deputy assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation controls.
//
Last edited by ontheroad; 12-06-2007 at 07:53 PM..
Reason: snipped for potential copyright violation
All this anxiety and hand wringing about Iran is much ado about nothing! They are a serious threat and we are in a perfect position, when France (of all places) has come out and made statements that Iran cannot be aloud to have nuculer capabilities, remember they are already at war with us in Iraq and responsible for killing American soldiers, we won't need to place one boot in Iran, just bombs, so all this silly "invasion" talk is just hyperventilating!
See this stuff, it is called Trinitite. This is what is left of the ground after a nuclear blast. It got its name from the first nuclear test site known as Trinity. A nice green glassy looking stuff… makes you want to buy some jewelry made of this huh?
Now, imagine an entire nation looking like the above sample, melted into green glass. It's not an idle fantasy. The US spent $5 trillion dollars (1950s dollars) building a nuclear deterrent capability that can actually do that; melt any nation and it's people into a giant slab of green glass. The USSR knew it, the world knows it, and Saddam knew it. The government of Iran knows it.
Either the deterrent works or it does not. If it doesn't, then the American taxpayers have been defrauded on a grand scale. But if the nuclear deterrent does work, then Iran can have all the weapons of mass destruction they want, they just won't dare use them. I doubt they would dare use them against the United States because they don't want to end up like that piece of green glass at the top of this page. There is no need to confront Iran over the issue of weapons of mass destruction.
As to the belief that Iran would spend billions of dollars developing a nuclear bomb then hand it or its technology over to terrorist groups is preposterous. Would the people and government of Iran risk utter obliteration by giving this stuff away? Unlike Iran, the United States has the ability to turn much of the face of the entire planet into that green glass so the mere thought of going up against such a thing should put even the most nefarious of leaders in check.
Does it take a certain kind of imagination, McCarthy's kind of imagination, to see into the future and imagine just The Road?
Well OTR, I think we are living in a time where faith based politics and ideologies are the meat and potatoes of it all. I have no doubt that there are some brilliant and sharp folks who are on top of the game but at the moment, everyone is holding their breath just trying to get through the next year. All hoping that king pin head doesn't do something even more stupid.
If you were to ask me just 10 years ago that America would be at the state it is today I would have said that such a notion would be science fiction or the work of some Tom Clancy and John Hagee collusion to write a scary novel.
Since obviously our entire nuclear arsenal is no longer a deterrent to even third rate countries, then I will await my refund check in the mail, or they can just have Ed McMann's prize patrol drop it off.
Lets see, 5 trillion divided by 300 million... oh yeah.
Leadership is sadly lacking even if there are some brilliant and sharp folks ... at some game. I sure hope it isn't a football game because that sure isn't going to help us, even with a sudden field goal.
And now with Pakistan added to the equation, the juggling must be nearly impossible in the White House.
Ten years ago, 1997, things things looked very different.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
News, No concrete evidence of Iran nuclear weapons program
