Realistic solutions for dealing with the Iran problem

[cherokee]

Me? I say let Iran do what it wants. Leave them alone for the time being, albeit, leave them with a very strong warning that if they mess up, we (The US) will destory them.

If they dont mess up, if they dont cause catastrophe and they are responsible with their nuclear amibtions, continue to leave them alone.

If they do mess up, they do cash in on the rest of western worlds fears, crush them. I'm not talking about how we are dinking around in Iraq, I'm talking carpet bomb, target mosques, target schools, level the whole country worse than has ever been seen in history.

Is that before or after them arm the Hezbollah with small nukes or dirty bomb material? Or maybe the Hamas?

 

[ARealConservative]

Israel doesn’t call for Iran destruction...(like I do)

No we cant. NO appeasing the sob's.
Israel is the ONLY friend we have in Middle (chit) East.
You people need to understand its not just the U S who doesn’t want Iran to have Nukes it’s the entire fooking region.


If they want nukes so bad send them a few....

1) Who is "You people"?

2) The entire fooking region doesn't want Israel to have nukes either - yet they do.

 

[bus]

Is that before or after them arm the Hezbollah with small nukes or dirty bomb material? Or maybe the Hamas?

They may have, or already have. Pre-emptivly attacking them I believe is the wrong answer and will put the United States into a situation similar to Iraq.

 

[Karmashock]

It is not acceptable to sell nuclear technology to pro-terrorist countries. PERIOD.

Shame on you for putting my life at risk so you can make a quick buck.

Russia's moron leader (yes, I know this is ironic coming from an American) needs to be removed from the Kremlin. He is a disgraceful jackass who is doing his very best to bring back the cold war.

Russia needs to be told POINT BLANK "Stop selling nuclear materials to Iran", if they fail to adhere to this standard, we need to start arming the Chechnian rebels.

If Russia wants to arm terrorists in a position to do us harm, we should repay that act by doing the same.

:doh

Wait a minute, I never suggested that was MY ideal situation.


Personally, I think nukes should be forbidden to any and all countries we can possibly forbid them to as a natural matter of course. There are enough nukes floating around without more people making them. What's more most of the nations that already have them are pretty good about not passing them off to third parties. New players might however make a point of just selling them/giving them/having them mysteriously but FREQUENTLY stolen by the same people over and over again... of course as a complete accident which should not be confused with ever giving the weapons out.


I was merely making suggestions as to how to perfect other people's strategies. I was not judging their ideas...


That person said that everyone has the right to nuclear weapons. So if everyone has a right to them then what is wrong with selling them to them? Right? I mean if they have a RIGHT to it then why is it wrong to sell it to them?


It's illogical.
======================================================

Me? I say let Iran do what it wants. Leave them alone for the time being, albeit, leave them with a very strong warning that if they mess up, we (The US) will destory them.

If they dont mess up, if they dont cause catastrophe and they are responsible with their nuclear amibtions, continue to leave them alone.

If they do mess up, they do cash in on the rest of western worlds fears, crush them. I'm not talking about how we are dinking around in Iraq, I'm talking carpet bomb, target mosques, target schools, level the whole country worse than has ever been seen in history. Do not help rebuild. Leave the message that you will not cause problems on a global scale and be left unscathed.

what would be your solution should Iran "lose" some nukes to terrorist orgs that then blow up a major city somewhere?


You see these ARE terrorist sponsor states and such states train, buy/make weapons for, and otherwise support terrorists. But when these terrorists do something in another country the country that trained and sponsored them is generally not held responsible. This is one of the main reasons terrorism is so popular. It's a way to wage war without risking anyone declaring war upon you.

The Bush doctrine which is controversial here states that to defeat terrorism we have to in fact confront countries that supply these terrorists and hold them responsible for the actions of these terrorists. Under the Bush doctrine for example if Iran gave a nuke to terrorists by some means and then those terrorists blew up a major US city. That would be considered effectively a Nuclear attack on the US by Iran.


Do you agree with this doctrine. If not what would you suggest instead. Furthermore please state your primary priorities. The Bush doctrine whether right or wrong was specifically designed to safe guard US security in the long term. That was it's goal. I am not saying that is what it does or for that matter that it does not do that. Only and specifically taht that is what it was designed to do.


So what are your objectives and how will you accomplish them.

 

[Tashah]

Israel has nukes - where's the hand wringing?

Israel developed a nuclear capability before the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1970.

We need to convince the world that American policy does not equal Israeli policy - and to do that, we need to enforce non-prolifieration equally - or not at all.

Then set a shining example. Eliminate all US nuclear weapons as called for in the NPT.

Next - we need to cease giving foreign aid to the region - which of course is primarily going to Israel.

Incorrect. Egypt receives the same amount of US foreign-aid as Israel.

Lastly - no more duel citienship status.

Lol. What in the world does that have to do with the Iranian problem?

Fix those things - and then we can talk with other parties in the ME as a nuetral party - and fight harder for non-proliferation.

The US doesn't enforce the NPT. That assignment belongs to the UN/IAEA.

 

[Gardener]

Lol. What in the world does that have to do with the Iranian problem?

Well...(nodnod, winkwink)...if the u.s. needs to convince the world that it's foreign policy does not equal Israel's policy,then there must be something to the notion that they are the same (nod nod wink wink), and since they are the same, we must guard against this dual loyalty thing where the Jews ....OOPS, I MEANT ZIONISTS, REALLY I DID I MEANT TO SAY **ZIONISTS** SORRY ABOUT THE CONFUSION, IT'S ZIONISTS -- where the zionists because of their duel loyalties are plotting and scheming behind the scenes in that way they always do and have done since time immemorial.

Now, once having dispatched this need to form our foreign policy according to the dictates of the J.....the Zionists with their duel loyalties, we can plainly see that Iran has some legitimate gripes. How dare Israel elevate the status of women to full equality with men. Don't they know that men own women just as they own any other possession? And what's this with the science and technology stuff? Give me a break. There has to be something wrong with Israel when it garners more Nobel awards in an average year than the entire Islamic world in the whole history of the awards. It's only right and fair that Iran has outlined it's plans to nuke Israel while offering the rationalization that it can destroy this cancer completely while the perfect Ummah is so vast that it will only receive only an inconveniencing setback with any retaliation.

How dare anybody challenge the perfect logic of that one? Obviously, if the U.S. fails to see Iran's plans as anything other than a generous offer to rid the world of such a scourge as the J....oops again, as the ZIONISTS, then it must be that those Zionists have us by the short hairs due to all their conniving and duel loyalties and stuff.

 

[Dogger807]

Of course I believe no one should have nukes . By the same token, I strongly believe some groups should not have nuke more than others.


governments lead by apocalyptic minded factions come very close to the top of the list of those who really shouldn't have nukes.

 

[Karmashock]

Stated goal: International stability of power, peace, and law.

someone has to have them... even if that someone were the UN and the UN only... I don't mind the security council members having them though. That if anything reinforces international law.


However, we've got about four or five nations at least outside of that that have them as well... and that number should if anything shrink. I think we could get Pakistan to get rid of it's nukes if the Indians got rid of theirs... but I don't think the indians will... the dictator of Pakistan is with all his faults pretty reasonable... but the indians can't get rid of a strategic weapon based upon something as transient as "who" the current leader is... they'd need long term ironclad assurances that their interests would be protected... and that's not anything that paper and promises can do. If they got rid of them and then he got assassinated they'd be in an inferior strategic position regardless of whether whomever was in charge to the north was crazy enough to launch.

 

[DivineComedy]

Why can't we cut a deal like we did with Cuba?

We promise not to attack if they give up their nuclear bomb ambitions.

Or they stop all enriching uranium and we can guarantee their safety.

Put them under our umbrella. Then we have a reason to stay in the area with them feeling safe, Israel feeling safe. Everybody feeling safe.

Win Win all the way around. No losers.

What's the chance of that if we decide to start talking to Iran?

Or we could talk through the Russians.

We need to talk more and saber rattle less.

Excellent Idea! I am glad that you are finally coming around to my way of thinking. Let’s “cut a deal like we did with Cuba.”

Since your solution is the most realistic, and the Democrats are about to regain Camelot, Iran’s safety is already guaranteed.

State Sponsors of Terrorism

Now if Iran will not stop being a State Sponsor of Terrorism, that has called for Jihad and chanted “Death to America“ since Carter, and they will not “give up their nuclear bomb ambitions,” let them be treated just like the sponsor of Cuba. I just love your idea.

Such a brilliant idea shows that you truly know your history. Put them under the umbrella. And by all means, “we could talk through the Russians:”

JFK on the Cuban Missile Crisis

It shall be the policy of this Nation to regard any nuclear attack launched from a terrorist against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an attack by the State
Sponsors of Terrorism on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon the State Sponsors of Terrorism.

Mutual is the fear of any terror,
Assured we contest the allied should partake,
Destructions to apply till equal
portion share,
fear
I
Say to sponsors of terror!​

 

[cherokee]

Well...(nodnod, winkwink)...if the u.s. needs to convince the world that it's foreign policy does not equal Israel's policy,then there must be something to the notion that they are the same (nod nod wink wink), and since they are the same, we must guard against this dual loyalty thing where the Jews ....OOPS, I MEANT ZIONISTS, REALLY I DID I MEANT TO SAY **ZIONISTS** SORRY ABOUT THE CONFUSION, IT'S ZIONISTS -- where the zionists because of their duel loyalties are plotting and scheming behind the scenes in that way they always do and have done since time immemorial.

Now, once having dispatched this need to form our foreign policy according to the dictates of the J.....the Zionists with their duel loyalties, we can plainly see that Iran has some legitimate gripes. How dare Israel elevate the status of women to full equality with men. Don't they know that men own women just as they own any other possession? And what's this with the science and technology stuff? Give me a break. There has to be something wrong with Israel when it garners more Nobel awards in an average year than the entire Islamic world in the whole history of the awards. It's only right and fair that Iran has outlined it's plans to nuke Israel while offering the rationalization that it can destroy this cancer completely while the perfect Ummah is so vast that it will only receive only an inconveniencing setback with any retaliation.

How dare anybody challenge the perfect logic of that one? Obviously, if the U.S. fails to see Iran's plans as anything other than a generous offer to rid the world of such a scourge as the J....oops again, as the ZIONISTS, then it must be that those Zionists have us by the short hairs due to all their conniving and duel loyalties and stuff.

Hey you stole my post.
I was going to post the very same thing. I was honest..
Those damn Zionists!..................:roll:

Ok we need to investigate this. I will volunteer to go over and hangout with Tashah and ALL of her female friends (the ones pictures in her links)
I will probe each of them for any information on the great Zionists Master plan. I'll spend as much time as it takes to undress oop's...I mean uncover the truth from each and everyone of them.
If I'm not back in a month wait 2 more months. Then send word by messenger pigeon.

 

[Iriemon]

Well...(nodnod, winkwink)...if the u.s. needs to convince the world that it's foreign policy does not equal Israel's policy,then there must be something to the notion that they are the same (nod nod wink wink), and since they are the same, we must guard against this dual loyalty thing where the Jews ....OOPS, I MEANT ZIONISTS, REALLY I DID I MEANT TO SAY **ZIONISTS** SORRY ABOUT THE CONFUSION, IT'S ZIONISTS -- where the zionists because of their duel loyalties are plotting and scheming behind the scenes in that way they always do and have done since time immemorial.

Now, once having dispatched this need to form our foreign policy according to the dictates of the J.....the Zionists with their duel loyalties, we can plainly see that Iran has some legitimate gripes. How dare Israel elevate the status of women to full equality with men. Don't they know that men own women just as they own any other possession? And what's this with the science and technology stuff? Give me a break. There has to be something wrong with Israel when it garners more Nobel awards in an average year than the entire Islamic world in the whole history of the awards. It's only right and fair that Iran has outlined it's plans to nuke Israel while offering the rationalization that it can destroy this cancer completely while the perfect Ummah is so vast that it will only receive only an inconveniencing setback with any retaliation.

How dare anybody challenge the perfect logic of that one? Obviously, if the U.S. fails to see Iran's plans as anything other than a generous offer to rid the world of such a scourge as the J....oops again, as the ZIONISTS, then it must be that those Zionists have us by the short hairs due to all their conniving and duel loyalties and stuff.

I never thought the beef was with how Israelis treated their woman, but the exercise of domain over the holy lands.

 

[Karmashock]

I never thought the beef was with how Israelis treated their woman, but the exercise of domain over the holy lands.

which would if anything be a thousand times worse if in the hands of another Muslim theocracy. I mean these cats are so stone cold intolerant that you can't even bring OTHER religious texts into the country of any description what so ever. Frankly, besides Israelis committing the moral sin of not being Muslim I don't see what their complaint really is...

 

[128shot]

Israel doesn’t call for Iran destruction...(like I do)

No we cant. NO appeasing the sob's.
Israel is the ONLY friend we have in Middle (chit) East.
You people need to understand its not just the U S who doesn’t want Iran to have Nukes it’s the entire fooking region.


If they want nukes so bad send them a few....

Is Iran's President Really a Jew-hating, Holocaust-denying Islamo-fascist who has threatened to "wipe Israel off the map"?


So, the president of Iran said what?

 

[128shot]

Israel developed a nuclear capability before the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1970.

Which they never signed.

Israel and weapons of mass destruction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Gardener]

I never thought the beef was with how Israelis treated their woman, but the exercise of domain over the holy lands.

Considering that you are on record as stating women are responsible for their being raped rather than the men who rape them, I think you would fit in well with the Mullahs.

 

[Gardener]

Ok we need to investigate this. I will volunteer to go over and hangout with Tashah and ALL of her female friends (the ones pictures in her links)
I will probe each of them for any information on the great Zionists Master plan. I'll spend as much time as it takes to undress oop's...I mean uncover the truth from each and everyone of them.
.

I salute you, sir!

Once a marine always a marine, and I see you are still willing to risk life and limb in what surely must be some difficult situations. Even out numbered as you would be I have faith that you would be able to lick them all.

In a fair fight, that is.

 

[Tashah]

Israel developed a nuclear capability before the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1970.

Which they never signed.

And? What is your point? No nation is obliged to sign the NPT... it is a voluntary undertaking. As for NPT signatory members...

The United States, Russia, China, Britain, and France are all in violation of the spirit of the NPT which calls for the total nuclear-weapons disarmament of all signatory states. South Africa was in NPT violation and voluntarily scrapped its nuclear arsenal. India, Pakistan, and North Korea all violated the NPT to obtain nuclear WMD. Iran is currently in violation of the NPT.

Why single out Israel which never was a NPT signatory state and ignore the dismal record of the NPT signatory states above?

Israel has never admitted possessing nuclear weapons, has never tested nuclear weapons, has never used a nuclear weapon, and has never threatened anyone with a nuclear weapon. Unlike the NPT signatory states denoted above, the proposition that Israel even possesses nuclear weapons is at best speculation and conjecture.

 

[128shot]

And? What is your point? No nation is obliged to sign the NPT... it is a voluntary undertaking. As for NPT signatory members...

The United States, Russia, China, Britain, and France are all in violation of the spirit of the NPT which calls for the total nuclear-weapons disarmament of all signatory states. South Africa was in NPT violation and voluntarily scrapped its nuclear arsenal. India, Pakistan, and North Korea all violated the NPT to obtain nuclear WMD. Iran is currently in violation of the NPT.

Why single out Israel which never was a NPT signatory state and ignore the dismal record of the NPT signatory states above?

Israel has never admitted possessing nuclear weapons, has never tested nuclear weapons, has never used a nuclear weapon, and has never threatened anyone with a nuclear weapon. Unlike the NPT signatory states denoted above, the proposition that Israel even possesses nuclear weapons is at best speculation and conjecture.

India and Pakistan are not signed members of the NPT either.

Its hard to see the merits of criticism from a country that can't admit it has nuclear weapons and refuses to sign the NPT treaty. the treaty is not a very strong argument for Iranians disarmament.

 

[Tashah]

Its hard to see the merits of criticism from a country that can't admit it has nuclear weapons and refuses to sign the NPT treaty.

Israel has neither admitted nor denied possession of nuclear weapons. Additionally, it seems as though you do not understand the term voluntarily. Iran voluntarily elected to sign (an original signatory) the NPT in 1970. Israel voluntarily elected to decline the NPT.

If one assumes that Israel has nuclear weapons, one must also consider this assumption in the proper context. Most intelligence estimates assign Israel a nuclear capability previous to 1970, which predates the NPT. In this context then, even if Israel does indeed possess nuclear weapons and had signed the NPT, she would be classified as a pre-existing nuclear power along with the US, UK, Russia, France, and China. The main focus of the NPT for this class is for an eventual and complete nuclear disarmament. In other words, the NPT (would) apply to Israel and (does) apply to Iran quite differently.

the treaty is not a very strong argument for Iranians disarmament.

On the contrary, the NPT is the strongest diplomatic tool available to foster an Iranian disarmament. To propose that Iran is not responsible for its obligations suggests that no nation is required to honor its commitments.

 

[128shot]

Israel has neither admitted nor denied possession of nuclear weapons. Additionally, it seems as though you do not understand the term voluntarily. Iran voluntarily elected to sign (an original signatory) the NPT in 1970. Israel voluntarily elected to decline the NPT.

Under the Shah, perhaps. the Ayatollahs have yet to voluntarily believe in the NPT.

If one assumes that Israel has nuclear weapons, one must also consider this assumption in the proper context. Most intelligence estimates assign Israel a nuclear capability previous to 1970, which predates the NPT. In this context then, even if Israel does indeed possess nuclear weapons and had signed the NPT, she would be classified as a pre-existing nuclear power along with the US, UK, Russia, France, and China. The main focus of the NPT for this class is for an eventual and complete nuclear disarmament. In other words, the NPT (would) apply to Israel and (does) apply to Iran quite differently.

Not if it continually denies having nuclear weapons. In that case when it admits to having nuclear weapons it will be after 1970. When Israel officially acknowledges it has nuclear weapons, that will be the date things internationally regarding nuclear weapons will matter to Israel and the world.

So NPT would apply, since their official admittance would be post 70

On the contrary, the NPT is the strongest diplomatic tool available to foster an Iranian disarmament. To propose that Iran is not responsible for its obligations suggests that no nation is required to honor its commitments.

As I'm sure Iran will say, the NPT was signed under the years of the Shah, and not under the current regime setup under Ayatollahs.

So really, they can and will ignore it as a pre-Ayatollah agreement and therefore does not apply today

 

[Tashah]

Under the Shah, perhaps. the Ayatollahs have yet to voluntarily believe in the NPT.

To my knowledge, nations cannot legally abrogate treaty commitments simply because the leadership changes.

Not if it continually denies having nuclear weapons. In that case when it admits to having nuclear weapons it will be after 1970. When Israel officially acknowledges it has nuclear weapons, that will be the date things internationally regarding nuclear weapons will matter to Israel and the world. So NPT would apply, since their official admittance would be post 70

Admission of a nuclear weapons capability does not equate with the inception of that capability. If such a capability exists, I am quite certain that pertinint documentation would date this capability. Perhaps you are correct in your assumption however. If so, then it seems to me that an admission of nuclear capability would be inimical to the best interests of Israel. In such a scenario, admission would probably be prohibitive and counterproductive. Why would Israel (or any nation) willingly embrace self-flagellation?

As I'm sure Iran will say, the NPT was signed under the years of the Shah, and not under the current regime setup under Ayatollahs.

They may indeed say that. But that does not negate the legality of their commitment in the eyes of the international community. Any nation can withdraw from the NPT. That said, such a withdrawal would not insulate Iran from international sanctions. At the present time, Iran prefers to be in violation of the NPT rather than... in violation and opting out. A double whammy.

So really, they can and will ignore it as a pre-Ayatollah agreement and therefore does not apply today

Check up on international treaty convention. Denying the Sun is yellow does not suffice to convince and convert other observers.

 

[cherokee]

Is Iran's President Really a Jew-hating, Holocaust-denying Islamo-fascist who has threatened to "wipe Israel off the map"?


So, the president of Iran said what?

Are you kidding me?
You post crap from the Info clearing house like its real news?.....:roll:

 

[cherokee]

I salute you, sir!

Once a marine always a marine, and I see you are still willing to risk life and limb in what surely must be some difficult situations. Even out numbered as you would be I have faith that you would be able to lick them all.

In a fair fight, that is.

Thank you Gardner.
I will always answer my counties call.

 

[Karmashock]

Well, we said this would happen and as usual no one listened.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/world/middleeast/15sunnis.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin


Now the whole middle east is going to go nuclear.

“We will develop [our nuclear energy program] openly,” Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, said of the council’s effort. “We want no bombs. All we want is a whole Middle East that is free from weapons of mass destruction,” an Arab reference to both Israel’s and Iran’s nuclear programs.

Deterrence through peaceful nuclear “energy.”

Anyone that isn't aware of the strategic domino effect in the works is an idiot. Period.

The only thing keeping japan and South Korea from going nuclear has been repeated and expressed assurences by the US that we will nuke NK if they start anything. But if Iran's nuke program is not shut down the entire middle east is effectively letting YOU know right now... that they're going to go nuclear as well.

So decide idiots. Want everyone to have nukes? Is that your dream future? It's coming. And no matter how hard you sell the line that the US and other western powers as "horrible demons" you know that's a load of crap.


Iran is doing this for one reason and that is to aquire the same status as NK. They want US aid and the ability to get away with pretty much anything. Well, that's what you've given them by giving them enough rope to strangle us with it. Good work. And don't tell me that this only happened because the US military is tied up in other countries. We have more then enough excess capability to bomb those facilities into massive craters. It doesn't matter how many of them there are and it doesn't matter how deep they are. The bunkers if not destroyed could at least be buried under so much rubble that it would take days with a major opperation to get anything out... and if that's what it would take for them to do it, then we could certainly just bomb it again until they realized that it was going to stay buried.

This was caused by millions it seems of useful idiots that bought an idiotic load of crap about the Iranian's "peaceful" intentions. The depths of that kind of frank foolishness simply astounding to me.

When will people learn that the world is not a nice place filled with little pink ponies and candycane mountains... the fastest way get your head cut off is to assume that no one would ever do that... or that they wouldn't do it if you were 'nice' to them.

Just astounding.

 

[ARealConservative]

Israel developed a nuclear capability before the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1970.

Convenient. :roll:

Incorrect. Egypt receives the same amount of US foreign-aid as Israel.

foreign-aid is pretty far encompassing- Taking into account all grants, loans, and government contracts -Israel gets more U.S. money then any other country.

Lol. What in the world does that have to do with the Iranian problem?

It's symbolic - allegiance to only 1 country. Having citizens that are also citizens of Israel plays right into the hands of the mentality that one of us is the puppet of the other.