John

with all the talk about the uranium enrichment program who thinks they will sucseed and eventually destroy any opposing countries? We need to just invade the plants and destroy them before innocent lives are destroyed

Katczinsky

There's no evidence leading us to believe that they will develop nuclear weapons for the next decade or so.

Invade and destroy them before innocent lives are destroyed? Thereby destroying...innocent lives...in the process? What sense does that make?

I mean, you must be unconscious or something...have you learned a thing in the Iraq episode?

I mean, maybe I'm a little rash for saying that...but the amount of ignorant talk about Iran that parallels the talk about Iraq prior to the invasion just amazes me.

I've said it many times and I am saying it now. The best thing we can do is to defuse the situation a bit so that the Iranians wouldn't feel compelled to develop a nuclear arsenal in the first place. It's been proven to work much better than military force. Maybe it's fear of being typecast as anti-semitic, but the policy this administration and many in Washington have taken is completely irrational. Yes, we need to respect the sovereignty of Israel...but this has just gone too far; we deny the potentially aggressive state of Iran to develop nuclear weapons, yet we turn a blind eye when an actively aggressive state of Israel develops a nuclear arsenal.

If Iran truly is developing nuclear weapons, really the only main reason would to be to keep up with Israel...a state that they perceive as a direct threat against them. You look throughout history, at arms races, each time one side ponies up the arms, the other side tries to compensate. The answer isn't to let Iran develop them, and the answer isn't to militarily force them into submission. The answer is to put the same amount of pressure on Israel to stop their aggression and stop their nuclear program. If we did that I am sure Iran would be more willing to make their programs much more internationally transparent.

Oh, but the Republicans can't do that because they will be perceived as 'weak', and the Democrats can't do that because they don't want to upset their Jewish constituency. Because God forbid if either one of those happens if we can solve the situation.

__________________
Political Compass:

Economic Left/Right: -9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.72

hkbajwa

Well put Kat.

The obsession with Iran is horribly misguided. It is merely symptomtic of a slightly primitive policy environment that the only soution that is presented involves warfare.

Iran actionsdo not cause nearly as much rucus as Israel's does.This is not to say that Idrael does not have a right to exist, but it does seem like Israel can do ANYTHING it wishes in the name of "survivial" "self-preservation" and "self defense".

Were Israel's actions tobe curbed a bit or were they even to be treated equally, the ME situation would be diffused SUBSTANTIALLY. It is merely another example of how certain admins prefer to eradicate SYMPTOMS rather than treat the disease ( again Israel is NOT the disease, but rather it is the Palestine - Israel conflict that is the source of much polarization, distrust and anger int he world. Treat that situation in an unbiased manner and MANY potential conflicts can be avoided).

__________________
Love for all, Hatred for none

Preacherman

If we had any brains we would take out the nuke sites asap. Unlike Iraq, we know Iran is enriching uranium. Its been reported to the security councle, that Iran refuses mandatory inspections. There president has now said countless times that both Israel and America "will soon die". And that Israel will be "wiped off the map." These are not statments to be taken lightly, especialy by a man whos country is now in full industrial nuclear production.

Also, not many folks know this, but the president of Iran believes he has a roll in bring in there messiah. He will do all he can to start world war, as soon as this spring.

Preacherman

Wow, your crazy. Israel is surrounded by neighbors that want her destruction. Almost no one around them recognizes there right to even be. The arabs can lose to the Israelis 1000 times, and nothing is changed. But if Israel loses one time, its all over for them. If Israels action were to be curbed? then what? Then they will sit still while the terrorist from the north south east west bomb the hell outta Israel? Can you imagine what Mexico would look like if they decided to lob rockets at us every day? I promise you it would look worse than palistine does today. No other country is expected to put up with as much as Israel does from its neighbors.

hkbajwa

Yeah preacher like i said i understand the precarious nature of Israel's existence. However you must admit that much of their activity particularly against the Palestinians is overkill and indeed uncalled for.

I mean so they give back Gaza, but shut it off from the rest of the world without giving it access to ports, airports or th ability to manage its own border. Also they continue settlements termed illegal by the UN.

Israel isn't spotless and much of their activity goes BEYOND legitimate self-defense into the realm of suppression and discrimination and outright warcrimes against the palestinians. Like i said the arab nations aren't spotless either, but in order for any solution to be reached, BOTH sides need to accept responsibility. The onus cannot be placed entirely with the arab/palestinians as it is now.

Lastly regarding this situation it is incorrect to say that Israel continues to be under threat of its existence from all its neighbors. For instance EGYPT already has diplomatic ties ( whcih means they have accepted Israels right to exist ) Jordan also has ties. Likewise the arab nations are getting past the concept of Israel's destruction. But this process would move a WHOLE LOT FASTER if Israel would stop bulldozing "suspected" militant hideout and expand their settlements into palestinian land. Of course activities like the AL Aqsa mosque debacle could also easily be avoided by giving the restoration job to a muslim nation like Egypt or Jordan.

This is not 1948 and Israel no longer needs to fear for its existence. No arab nation will invade again since Israel has a brilliant defence force PLUS nuclear capability ( lacked by ALL its neighbors )

Regarding Iran, can you tell me what the US feels about mandatory inspections on US soil. NONE of you would accept it as it is a direct violation of your sovereignty.. How then can you possibly think another sovereign nation would accept that which your nation will not?

Ownership of nukes is NOT a guarantee that they will be used.. However it DOES mean that other nations will think twice before fuckin with you. Is it so unthinkable that a nation would like that sort of power?

Also your view of Irani politics is quite unnuanced. Time magazine recently did an article about Iran. One thing that is noticable is that the younger generation is moving away from the confrontational stance of the older generation (to which ahmedinejad belongs) Even the Ayatollah has censured Ahmedinejad because he find his aggressive rhetoric a bit too much. Iranis aren't crazed fundos, and there is no reason to assume the WHEN Iran gets a nuke ( many years hence) that Ahmedinejad or his ilk will be in power OR that there is ANY Irani who would throw a nuke ANYWHERE ( Knowing FULL WELL that the first to initiate Nuclear war will be wiped off the map by the rest of the world) .

__________________
Love for all, Hatred for none

Preacherman

,

Communist223

Well, if they are setting up santions then they must be doing something wrong. They've even said publically that they would expand and start construction WOMD.

canadiandude223

We need to stop Iran from enriching uranium before they do produce WOMD and put innocent lives in danger. Wether will do or not is yet to be determined but do we really want to take that chance? We need to stop them before it gets out of hand and WWIII starts.

hkbajwa

There is no "restraint" in Israel's actions AT ALL. You have to put things in perspective. The palestinians hav no weapons, no economy, no defese system, NOTHING. I realize that suicide bombing etc is a cruel and vile method or warfare, but how can you possibly say that it is any less cruel than the helicopter attacks, the bulldozing of civilian housing and the DAILY killing of innocent palestinians.

As the situation is, the palestinian people have only two choices. Shut up and take everything Israel gives them, OR fight back with the ONLY WEAPONS AVAILABLE TO THEM. You seem to demonize the palestinians simply because their weapons are SEEM more horrific. Yet more innocent palestinians die at the hands of Israelis than vice versa. How can you claim that Israeli kililng is less cruel simply because they have better equipment.
First of all i find it AWFUL that you are under some grave misconception that the Palestinians should grovel in gratitude for Israel's graciousness in getting out of Gaza. It is this attitude that not only reduces the palestinians to the level of animals, it is in fact this attitude that prevents peace from coming about. The paklestinians do not have to be thankful for ANYTHING.

PA should consider themselves LUCKY? So you honestly think that it is an act of mercy to not destroy this nation? How incredibly arrogant to think so. You make it sound like the nation of Palestine has no right to exist. I cannot understand why there is outrage at the fact that the palestinians are angry and they are fighting back. Lets just pretend that the US was annexed by the canadians. Would you not fight back tooth and nail to get them the hell out. Well this is how Israel is to Palestine. As far as the palestinians are concerned they were LIVING THERE when some outsiders happened by and devided that THEY owned the placve. After which they proceeded to kick out and lock down those who were already living there.
Well again that is just as rhetorical a statement from Israel as it is from Palestine. Israel has yet to stop the illegal expansion into Palestinian land. In fact Olmert just inaugurated a NEW settlement on Palestinian land. I mean come on dude. What end is being held up. They just CLAIM they will once the palestinians stop. Well the palestinians calim THEY will when the Israelis stop THEIR tresspass.
Well he certainly SHOULD be taken seriously and be BROUGHT TO THE NEGOTIATING TABLE (as he has suggested MANY TIMES). But that requires that the US stop demanding PRE-REQUISITES. How can any government realistically expect to negotiate, when they wish capitulation PRIOR TO TALKS.
It seems we disagree with HOW to fight terrorism. Israeli actions INCREASE the motivation for terrorism. It INcreases the frustration in the youth to a level where they blow themselves up. It INcreases the number of people who hate Israel. I NEVER said fight terrorism. But change the method of fighting it. The current strategy is NOT WORKING. As the more powerful party in this debacle the onus is on ISRAEL to alter their method of engagement. Palestine is left with no choice other than capitulation.. and how can you expect a nation to capitulate? I mean the US would never do so.
Absolutely not. More nations are willing to accept Israel NOW than EVER BEFORE simply because violence int he ME is such a huge problem now that the existence of Israel is certainly the LESSER of two evils. That is why more muslim nations have engaged in talks with Israel. Iran and Syria will follow, but not as long as there is a lockdown on negotiations with them. How can they accept a nation when nobody wants to talk to them.
The US of A has 10,000 registered nuclear warheads. There is NO WAY IN HELL that the US would allow independent inspections of US nuclear facilities. It has never happened nor will the US EVER ALLOW IT. Because apparently the US has the right to own nukes whereas nobody else does. How's that for global equality?
Ever heard of MAD ( Mutually Assured Destruction). That was the doctrine that guided nuclear proliferation in the world. If EVERYBODY had a nuke it would mean that NOBODY could fuck with ANYBODY ELSE without risking getting a city or two wiped out by a nuke.

And yes the president of Iran ( inflammatory rhetoric aside ) is NOT crazy enough to use them. He knows as well as anybody else that he would be dooming his nation if he used them. Don't credit a leader with complete insanity ( especially considering the fact that he has made NUMEROUS OVERTURES to the US to sit down for talks - Did you ever read his letter to Bush?). Ahmedinejad has been calling for talks CONTINUOUSLY in order to DIFFUSE the tension. The refusal comes from the US because they ahve some crazy notion that they can demand concessions PRIOR to negotiations.
How can you say that Ahmedinejad's goal is to bring world war? Is that a part of his manifesto? Or is it an ASSUMPTION? For him to state that WW will follow if the current direction is maintained, is actually a statement of the current situation, WHICH HE HAS STATED HE WANTS TO CHANGE BY ENGAGING IN TALKS. It is NOT a GOAL. To assume that is not only incorrect, it is also a gross prejudice.

In typical US propoganda style, the leader of a people is demonized to a ridiculous extent. Let me put some things in perspective:

1) Ahmedinejad is NOT the sole authority in Iran. Iran has a political structure which prevents him from engaging in nuclear war.

2) The desire for nuclear capability is NOT the dream of ONE man. It is a desire expressed by the IRANI PEOPLE. OF COURSE they want a nuke. They too are sick of being bullied by the US.

3) The assumption that Ahmedinejad think he would GAIN anything by world war is PURE CONJECTURE. Every single thinking human KNOWS that a world war will DESTROY the world.. there will be nothing left to claim victory over.

4) Iran will NEVER be supported in a nuclear war. It is a FACT that ANY nation initiating a nuclear war will be THE FIRST TO BE WIPED OUT. And no matter how crazy a person is, SELF PRESERVATION definately TOPS THE LIST OF PRIORITIES.

5) There is NO reason to assume that Iran is any less capale of handling nuclear capability. This is merely US hubris. Exactly what qualifies the US as being a "safer" country? The US has started more armed conflict on this planet int he past 100 years than any other nation. It is also the ONLY nation to actually have USED a nuke inwarfare.. yet you assume that Iran is more unsafe? What reason do you have for that other than prejudice?

6) The US has NO BASIS to claim that THEY deserve to have nuclear power whereas other do not. WHo are they to decide.

7) The NPT was a treaty designed BY the nuclear powers FOR the nuclear powers. The consensus is that NOBODY should have nuclear bombs. There is NO CONSENSUS as to whether only the US as certain other selected nations can have nuclear power. In fact i would think that ISRAEL is MORE likely to use their nuke as you claim they are in constant danger of extinction.. But how come nobody goes nuts about that? Oh i forget.. they have US patronage and acceptance that they are "OK" to possess nukes.

Listen Preacher i am really not trying to justify violence, NOR am i supporting Ahmedinejad's rhetoric. The point is merely that the problem is more nuanced than you claim, and it certianly requires a LOT more introspection and re-evaltuation of curent tactics to solve. And the trend of condemning a nation/people/person for the failure of these tactics is a copout that does nothing to actually reach a solution.

STEP ONE at this point willbe to ENGAGE Iran in talks. Solutions will follow from that. But nothing will be solved as long as the US expects everybody to do their bidding, and throwing a tantrum when a nation/people/person refuses to do so.

__________________
Love for all, Hatred for none