Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

U.S. Fails to Deter Iran from Developing Nukes

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Robbien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 07:56 AM
Original message
U.S. Fails to Deter Iran from Developing Nukes
WASHINGTON -- Despite its defeat of Iraq, the United States has failed to deter Iran from pursuing its nuclear weapons program.

A study published by the U.S. Army War College has asserted that the U.S. ouster of the regime of Saddam Hussein has led to an acceleration of Iran's nuclear weapons program. The report said neither Iran nor its ally, North Korea, has been swayed to abandon its missile or weapons of mass destruction programs.

"Iran also revealed a potential nuclear program more advanced than most suspected," the report, entitled Bounding the Global War on Terrorism," said. "Neither state seemed in the least bit deterred, although North Korea, under considerable pressure from China, finally entered into multilateral negotiations with as yet unknown results. The administration, however, did not take or even speak of military action against these states in part because of preoccupation with Iraq and in part because military action against Iran, and especially North Korea, would entail far greater difficulties and risks than action against Iraq."

Authored by Jeffrey Record, the report, which the college said does not represent the views of the U.S. Army, said the Bush administration chose to attack Baghdad because of the U.S. assessment that the Iraqi military would quickly collapse. In contrast, the administration has rejected any suggestions to attack neighboring Iran, with a much more powerful military, despite Teheran's huge nuclear and missile programs.

http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2004/april/04_25_2.ht...

Interesting take. Instead of the ME being cowed, this article states that the ME believes the US is weak since it will only attack its weakest threat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
54anickel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 08:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. "Iran nor its ally, North Korea"? WTF, are they allies now? I must have
missed something. I thought NK was based on isolation from the outside. Now I find they are in cahoots with Iran? :shrug: :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Economic ally - trade in atomic items
not best buddies!

:-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
54anickel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. Silly me! I was thinking of the more common definition of ally....
not the "member of axis of evil" = ally kind of ally. :silly:

Ally is a very interesting word when used politically, isn't it?

1. To place in a friendly association, as by treaty: Italy allied itself with Germany during World War II.
2. To unite or connect in a personal relationship, as in friendship or marriage.

v. intr.
To enter into an alliance: Several tribes allied to fend off the invaders.
Hey, that sounds just like the Iraqis

n. pl. allies
1. One that is allied with another, especially by treaty: entered the war as an ally of France.
2. One in helpful association with another: legislators who are allies on most issues. See Synonyms at partner.
3. Allies
3.a. The nations allied against the Central Powers of Europe during World War I. They were Russia, France, Great Britain, and later many others, including the United States.
3.b. The nations, primarily Great Britain, France, the Soviet Union, and the United States, allied against the Axis during World War II.
There's the one I'm looking for
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. North Korea has been selling
nuclear info & materials for a long time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rooboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. So has Pakistan...
but did they send the scientist concerned to prison? NOOOOOOOOO....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mulethree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. ICBMs too
Testing of new Korean long range missiles is done in Iran.
I suppose the funding must come from there as well.
Estimates on this newest missile are between 3500 and 6000 kilometer range.

So two countries, with great reasons to hate us, keep developing ICBM nukes, and we're off wasting time in Iraq because they must have WMD and have been known to use them.

Saddam let us wipe out his military and bankrupt his country without ever playing his WMD trump card and we're still more concerned with Iraq than with certifiable maniacs with nuke missiles like Iran, NK and Israel?

Sounds more reasonable to address these missile and nuke programs with a few flight of B-2's with precision bombs than a $50 billion disorganized ABM program and a $500 billion Iraq war.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
4. "Despite its defeat of Iraq, the United States has failed to deter Iran ..
from pursuing its nuclear weapons program."

The war has not been won...and everyday the US military and gov't looks weaker and more confused. Mission NOT Accomplished.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
central scrutinizer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. D'oh
Iran is not stupid - there was an obvious lesson from the Iraq invasion. Besides the oil, Iraq was invaded because it was weak. Unless you want to be next, develop nuclear weapons as soon as possible. Thanks to the neocons, we are a LOT less safer and secure than we were in March 2003. All we need now is for Israel to launch a pre-emptive strike against an Iranian nuclear facility as they did against Iraq in the 80's and the fundies will attain their dream of armageddon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis-t Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. You hit it RIGHT on the head CS.
Anyone who thinks Libya (who was not on our radar, not an 'axis of evil' member, and had been trying to get back in our good graces since the Clinton Admin) was intimidated into opening up to weapons inspectors because of * f*ck the war president is delusional. Qaddafi is only interested in the financial benefit of turning over his weapons program related activity inklings. Removal of trade sanctions will benefit him immensely. Whether any of the money will ever reach Libyan citizens is another matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
6.  would entail far greater difficulties and risks than action against Iraq.
Iraq is a cake walk remember so think twice about invading North Korea or Iran. Iraq was rendered defenseless over the ten years of sanctions and bombings and inspections. That was why the bullies picked on it. It could not defend itself and they knew it. Iran on the other hand is capable and so is North Korea. We will not attack a country that can fight back. It isn't the New American way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yeah, but Saddam was a sneaky old devil.
He left lot's of unguarded arms dumps around in
case his citizens needed them after he was gone.
Winning the conventional war is just the first
step, and one can expect the invadees to skip it
from here on out and just prepare straightway for
the guerilla resistance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shadu Donating Member (889 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. I hope Iran and Syria have lots of hidden arms dumps
I fear they are going to need them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barkley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-04 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
8. Great Post!
Edited on Sat Apr-24-04 11:21 AM by Barkley
Gee I wonder why Iran is still pursuing nukes?

From Iran's perspective the region has gotten
a whole lot more dangerous. With the most powerful
country in the world occupying next door and Israel
annexing territories and carrying out assassinations
with the full backing of the U.S. Its no wonder they
haven't abandoned nukes.

Pakistan has 'em.

Thank so much for this post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 18th 2014, 06:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC