Iran could simply halt its Nuclear program.

[951-Riverside]

I wonder why the Iranian leadership is hell bent on continuing this stupid program when they know full well it just gives the oil hungry Bush administration an excuse to invade them which will inevitably destroy their country and cost thousands of lives.

[bahrbearian]

1. ????

[HuffleClaw]

2. are you serious???

you think that would stop bush's 'march to war'? saddam was cooperating with us demands and look where that got him.

[billybob537]

5. DITTO`1

They don't care about reality it's all about what type of fear sells.

[wtmusic]

13. Exactly -- they will have to prove they *don't* have a weapons program

by presenting non-weapons for inspection. :crazy:

[HuffleClaw]

47. i expect it won't be long before bush tells the IAEA to remove its inspectors

and will THEN claim it was iran's doing. THAT will be the sign that war is imminent.

[HuffleClaw]

48. and bush would ALSO make some truly ludicrous demands

that no sane person would agree to.

[Solo_in_MD]

3. Its the Sharia...it makes them stupid

[Omphaloskepsis]

40. Ignorance does the same to you.

[Solo_in_MD]

44. I am quite confident I know the Sharia and what it does to people better than most, esp here

having lived in a country where Whabbi Islam ruled...

[jpak]

4. "Pride" is one of the Seven Deadly Sins - correct???

:shrug:

[wtmusic]

6. Shame on them for considering themselves a sovereign nation

and not a repository for our energy needs

[Webster Green]

7. Keeping up with the Jones' (as they say)

Nukes are trendy. Everybody's gotta have 'em.

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

[whistle]

25. Does Dick Cheney get regular high colonic enemas?

[PDJane]

8. Iran wanted to normalize relations,

Put their nuclear programme on the table, and this administration refused to engage in dialogue.

That tells me that this bunch are determined on their course. Minds are made up, don't let facts get in the way of a good war.

[twilight_sailing]

9. We are not going to invade or bomb them.

We can't. Bush might like to expand his war in the Middle East but we just can't do it. We don't have the troops, we don't have the money and nuking them will unleash hell on Earth, us included. We can't do it.

Why would Iran want nukes? To keep us the hell away from their doorstep. I, Twilight Sailing, encourage those who want to be free of US aggression to develop a nuclear program and nuclear bombs. It's the only thing that will save you from the likes of Bush.

[sufrommich]

15. Yes,we should encourage all

mullah led theocracies who wish to return to the dark ages to arm themselves with nuclear weapons.It really is that simple.

[twilight_sailing]

18. We have a mullah led theocracy right here, buddy.

[sufrommich]

20. Hyperbole at it's finest.n/a

[twilight_sailing]

22. Let's go back to the original point, if you like.

Nukes protect smaller countries from aggression. Agree or disagree.

[sufrommich]

23. Disagree.

Why would you assume that Iran would use them for defense?Because they seem so stable?They have vowed to wipe Israel off the map.Isn't that a big enough red flag for you?

[twilight_sailing]

24. No, it isn't.

Make a list of the people all over the world America (the government) hates.
Start with Venezuela and let me know when you get to 10.

[sufrommich]

26. As far as I know..

No American president(including the moron) have threatened to cause a country to cease to exist.Did I miss it?

[twilight_sailing]

28. Dodgeball anyone?

[sufrommich]

36. What am I dodging?

A list of all "the people" America hates?If you mean the current administration,it's irrelevant.Even they have not threatened a country with non-existence.The administration will change and a hopefully non neo con Democratic administration will govern differently.You do understand that it's not a government Iran is threatening,right?Do you believe Iran cares who's in power in Israel?Or that it would change their stance?

[twilight_sailing]

38. I wish you love

but I will not agree.


I never said a word about Israel, did I?

No problemo. You keep rocking on.

[twilight_sailing]

42. Nukes protect smaller countries from aggression. Agree or disagree.

Disingenuous.

[twilight_sailing]

46. "A list of all "the people" America hates?If you mean the current administration,it's irrelevant."

Tell that to them.

While they are laughing in your face, others do too.



Edited for bad grammar.

[twilight_sailing]

49. Show us what you are made of.

Now is the time to speak up.

When your arguments have been felled, what is an honest man to do?


You tell me.

[twilight_sailing]

52. Your silence shows us

what you are made of.

[malaise]

37. So why aren't they dealing with

Israel's very real nukes. Iran does not have nukes.

[Junkdrawer]

39. See Post 19. n/t

[Zhade]

43. Evidence that destroys your argument: NK didn't get invaded, while Iraq did.

Guess which one actually had a nucleat program at the time?

(And fyi, you might want to look into that translation - he said Israel should fade from history, not that it should be obliterated. You've been lied to.)

[Rage for Order]

53. Actually, that doesn't work

If North Korea had proven oil reserves on the same scale as Iraq, they very well may have ended up getting invaded. And on saying Israel should "fade from history", to deny all of the chants of "Death to Israel" and "Death to USA", and the innumerable times Iran has referred to the US as the Great Satan is naive. After all, Hitler didn't call his extermination of the Jews a holocaust or genocide, he called it the "final solution". It sounds much nicer to those who would have questions about one's intentions. Of course, I don't think we should fight Israel's wars for them.

It is also naive to think that Iran, or any other country for that matter, will stop at nuclear energy once they figure out the technology. They'll simply take the next logical step and weaponize that same technology.

[Zhade]

55. "And on saying Israel should "fade from history" - all I'm doing is correcting misinformation.

Regardless of the question of naivete, the fact remains he DIDN'T say what a lot of people have been told he said. That's my primary concern about that issue - to correct the misinformation, so debate is not predicated upon a false premise.

As far as NK, we don't have any way to test your theory, while my point has history to support it. I wonder if you're right; you could be, but there's no way to know.

And of course, MAD is the known reality when it comes to enemies who both possess nuclear weapons. If the Iranians do eventually obtain nukes, their proximity to Israel discourages anything but a MAD stance.

I should also take the opportunity to point out that the Iranian president does not control the military, and couldn't nuke Israel if Iran did have nukes - and he's not very popular in his own country.

As I think you probably agree, diplomacy is what's required here.

[Rage for Order]

60. I hope it's not too late

With all of the saber rattling coming from the bush administration i hope there is still a chance for diplomacy. The sad thing is, even if there is still time for it, is there any doubt bush would f**k up the diplomacy at least as badly as he's done with everything else he's touched?

And true, the Iranian president doesn't control the military, but if he was spouting off talking points that those who truly hold the power disagree with, they would certainly either let hom know about it or have him removed or silenced.

[krispos42]

34. We are encouraging them. By scaring them shitless

North Korea has nukes, so we invade Iraq.

And that is why the Iranians are pushing nuclear power and being a bit mysterious about their programs. If we THINK they have nukes, we don't invade them.

And our crazy Chimp-in-Chief's attitude towards Iran has scared Iranians so much that they voted in a Chimpy Equivilent, that Iranian President guy. Much as we looked to Bush in the days immediately after 9/11, so do they look towards and vote for the mullahs and Ahmudinijhad (or whatever his name is) when they see American forces on their coastline and on two borders.

[peacetalksforall]

50. I believed that for awhile - I think you uinderestimate the PNAC

madness. Somehow, their little sister think tanks AEI and AIPAC - the 'experts' in those think tanks who work out how PNAC can accomplish what the barons want, seem to 'know' that they have to do this now - they have to bomb the hell out of Iran to regress them, thus keeping them away from Israel and so they can invade, move on to Syria, and plunder them for the land and control (pipelines to the Israel and the Mediterranean. They may only be intending to take out missiles that can reach Israel and the supplies that Cheney sold them (as stated earlier by someone) so that they have to repurchased them if they (Iran) ever gets the chance to start their program again. That might be enough.

I hope not.

[Warren Stupidity]

51. "We can't" ? Of course we can.

We might or might not have the troops, I don't know and you don't know for sure if that is a true statement. I do know that we most certainly do have the capacity to bomb the crap out of them, and we are very likely planning to do just that. You entertain a bit of a false dichotomy there when you state "nuking them will unleash hell on Earth" as if that were the only choice when it come to bombing. Plus, while the reaction certainly would be negative, my guess is that the rest of the world would not do much of anything were we to use nuclear weapons against Iran. What exactly could the rest of the world do?

[Junkdrawer]

10. Good idea...And Israel could set an example and go first...n/t

[sufrommich]

19. And sit back and watch Israel turn to dust?

They are surrounded by enemies.Were we in the same situation,I would hope my government we be heavily armed.Just in case.

[Junkdrawer]

21. Ahh...Goose...Gander...n/t

[neoblues]

29. More like competitors...

They have ambitions--they want to increase their power (which is already significant) over the rest of the middle east... and that's exactly what we want too (for us to have power over the region).

[Zhade]

45. You'd think some Israel-firsters might have heard of Netenyahu's...

..."A Clean Break: A Strategy for Securing the Realm", a veeerrrrrry expansionist strategy embraced by the rightwing Israeli government and co-written by neocon stalwarts Richard "Prince of Darkness" Perle and Douglas "throw shitty little countries against the wall to show the world we mean business" Feith.

Yet they know less about the geopolitical situation than those of us who oppose rightwing expansionism in the Middle East. Funny, huh?

[leftchick]

11. I am sure they would if

Israel didn't have a shit load of nukes aimed at them. In addition with US carrier groups in the Persian Gulf threatening to attack, I can see why they feel the need. I believe there is some historical precedence to nuclear proliferation, this time the bogie man is terra instead of commies.

[Tom Joad]

12. You think this would stop the bushies and neocons from thinking up reasons?

so sweetly naive.

[951-Riverside]

16. You know I forgot they are now blaming Iran for giving weapons to the insurgents

So even if they got rid of the nuclear program it wouldn't help much.

Thanks for opening my eyes.

[dogman]

14. Right, it worked so well for Iraq.

Maybe they've watched how bushco operates and what happens if you belong to the axis of evil. Iraq, no nuke, attacked. North Korea, probable nuke, negotiations.

[pwb]

17. Iran is a good country

the people are nice. so is Venezuela or should we hate them because bush says too. why does bush hate them? because they compete with bush-saudi famiy oil.

[Greyhound]

27. Because they have the same ambitions that our wackos have.

arbusto is their OBL and he is very effective at keeping their people distracted and supportive.

[krispos42]

30. And Saddam could simply give up his NBC weapons progams

And then Bush wouldn't have any excuse at all to invade...

Oh, wait.

Damn. Well, Iran, beware the ides of March, is all I have to say.

(NBC=Nuclear, Biological, Chemical weapons. The acronym used before 'WMD' became cool)

[neoblues]

33. No, really... If every other nation simply obeyed us...

and were completely subservient as well as paying tribute (a majority of their national treasure and annual production)...

[krispos42]

35. Now you have the proper neo-con attitude!

Which federal agency that you are woefully ill-prepared to run do you want to be placed in charge of?

[TheWraith]

31. Pride, and the fact that the more they provoke us and Israel, the more solid their hold becomes.

It's not very well known, but the hard-liners in Iran have a woefully low level of real support. The only thing that keeps them in power is basically rigged elections. The more they can stir up belicose attitudes to and from the US, the more people rally to them. It's really no different than the game the Bush administration plays with them.

[Rosemary2205]

32. Don't blame the victim. GW is a goddamn bully.

It's not the battered wife's fault.

[Zhade]

41. Iraq DIDN'T have nukes and got invaded. NK does and didn't get invaded.

IIRC, 2+2 still equals 4.

[Dark]

54. North Korea doesn't have oil. Iraq does.

Global politics are a little more complicated than first grade arithmetic

[Zhade]

56. And if Iraq really DID have nukes, do you honestly think we'd have invaded?

I think the risk makes it elementary that it would not have happened. But there's no way to know for sure, as that didn't happen.

[sweetheart]

57. The new nukes are better and not regulated

New nuclear weapons are much more advanced than those uranium/plutonium things:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0510/0510071.pdf

'we' could simply halt 'our' nuclear program.

[ContraBass Black]

58. They have as much right to nuclear power as the US.

Neocon bluster does not negate their rights.

[NNN0LHI]

59. If they halted their nuclear program they know some day we will come and steal their oil

And turn their country into a Killing Field in the process.

The only thing that can possibly stop that from happening is a viable nuclear deterrent of their own. If I were an Iranian person I would want my country to possess nuclear weapons to protect our citizens from the USA after seeing what we have done to the Iraqis.

Saddam ended his nuclear program and got hanged. Don't you think the Iranians were watching?

So what would be their advantage to ending their nuclear program?

Don