StevenMeyer,

I agree with almost everything you said. Israels only importance to this issue stem from the claims by soft lefties that Iran should be nuclear armed because Israel is.

Its crazy logic for so-called progressives.

Why do you two bother? If others opinions are so opposite to yours that you cannot even consider there is a modicum of truth in their view, and it causes you both so much angst that you have resort to personal attacks on the holders of those opposite opinions.

Just take a look at your rantings in this opinion forum and you'll see the hycrotical nature of your views and then check out with Danielle her advice about attacking the messengers.

The behaviour of both of you really is laughable. It's affording my friends and I a great deal of entertainment.

Keith,

I notice you do not address the topic at hand.

What, if any, are the dangers of Iranian nukes?

What, if anything, should (can?) we do about it?

Are you CAPABLE of addressing the topic without a diatribe about Israel?

There are few dangers to many of us from Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. The one advantage the Iranians see in Iran having nukes is that is will cause great fear among the Israeli's and that will make them reassess their occupation, suppression and land stealing in Palestine.

Perhaps if the example of decenct diplomacy in the case of North Korea was followed and all countries in the region were prepared to disarm their nuclear capacity then sense might reign in the Iranian political and civil thought.

Now are you capable of answering that without personal abuse of moaning about poor little Israel?

Steven,

I think you are entirely correct about investment. Iran’s inflation rate is 15.8%. Iranians are calling for investment (whilst also asking that the present regime be expelled from the UN). They see that large investment would go a long way to undermining the current regime, which is not popular with many - perhaps the majority of Iranians.

Whilst Iran holds 11% of global oil reserves, second only to Saudi Arabia; in fact, is second in the world, it is unable to build its own refineries, losing much oil income. Also its oil infrastructure is decaying rapidly, mismanaged by a Soviet style state bureaucracy.

The current Iranian leadership is not just interested in maintaining power, but also seeing their mission as spreading the Islamic revolution throughout the Middle East (already terrorist attacks have occured in Europe), and if successful, worldwide. Iran funds Islamic fundamentalist organisations. Whilst we cannot comprehend the religious zealotry and beliefs of Ahjmadinejad, Iranians certainly do, and are alarmed. We should at least listen to those who understand such apocalytic visions.

But how easy and quickly is Iran able to produce nuclear weapons? U235, whilst easy to make into a bomb, is a problem because enrichment is very difficult, requiring a large, sophisticated physical plant. On the other hand, plutonium is easier to produce from reactors, but plutonium bombs are much harder to build.

Intelligence estimates vary about how long Iran would take to produce a nuclear warhead. Some state that with co-operation with North Korea, Iran could be in a position to test fire a low-grade device within 12 months; others - the break-up of the nuclear smuggling organisation of the Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadheer Khan has greatly set back the program; still others - Iran's effort to produce highly enriched uranium is still years from mastering the required technology.

cont ...

Given Iran’s size and its comparatively well-equipped armed forces, it does not face serious military threat. Nevertheless, with nuclear and missile programmes and the fact that Iran also funds fundamentalist terrorist organisations in the region, Arab States would be very nervous at the idea of possible nuclear devices in such hands. This may put Iran in a position to influence movement of oil supplies.

Russia is closely involved with Iran. Russia could well be manipulating Iran, which is dancing to Russian turnes.

Possibly Russia wants to be principal source of Europe’s energy supplies - using vast energy resources as a political tool - thus have a dominant role in international affairs.

With the largest source of gas reserves in the world, including the Barents Sea, the Yamal peninsula and eastern Siberia, Russia is also negotiating with Iran to drill for Iran’s natural gas. Given Iran's massive oil reserves, Russia would not want to see Iran nuked.

“Moscow has delayed the start-up of Iran's first nuclear power station to 2008 because Tehran has fallen behind with payments for the Bushehr plant (July 2007)”
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=11946(Reuters)

On October 1, 2007, The Khorramshar News Agency, published by the ethnic Arab underground of Iran’s oil-rich Khuzestan, reported that the entire staff of Russian nuclear engineers and experts employed in building the nuclear reactor at Bushehr had returned to Russia.
http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=4636

“Analysts have speculated that Moscow could be tweaking its policy towards Tehran or that the Kremlin is using Bushehr as a bargaining chip in a wider diplomatic game”
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=11946(Reuters)

I suspect that Iran is an unwitting puppet of Russia. Large investment in Iran could well be the solution to any nuclear powers in Iranian hands.