Israel can't let it happen. Full stop. America will never be under rocket threat from Iran because Israel JUST CAN'T let them have that initial capability. The risk is too great and there's WAY too many unknowns. You REALLY don't think some beardy nutter is capable of letting off a nuke...REALLY?. Damn straight they are, they LOVE blowing stuff up, and the bigger the better.

The nuclear disarmament is a prelude to tightening the screws on Iran. When Iran finally has the choice between nukes or its economy it will probably back down.

The existing sanctions are hurting, the proposed ones will cripple its industry.

Libya folded after a decade, under the same pressure.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I'm not sure history supports your assumption. North Korea was not dissuaded and the experience of Pakistan's and its treatment by the US after it had exploded a nuclear weapon would only offer hope to the Iranians.

The only country in recent times that altered its behavior because of sanctions was Iraq and we all know how far that got them.

"O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the Promised One, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."
Thus spake Ahmedinejad to the United Nations in 2005.
http://www.danielpipes.org/3258/the-mystical-menace-of-mahmoud-ahmadinejad
It may be comforting to believe that nobody wants MAD.
But what if one of the major players is simply MAD?
Ahmedinejad has indicated on more than one occasion that he believes himself to be the harbinger of the Mahdi, "the restorer of religion and justice who will rule before the end of the world".
If Ahmedinejad believes we are in the end times and that it is his destiny to prepare the way for the Mahdi, then he would not be constrained by the fear of mutually assured destruction.
With Obama apparently being prepared to countenance a nuclear armed Iran, we should be in for interesting times.

Proxy

One variant of the game of chicken is as follows.

Two cars drive towards each other at high speed. The first driver to veer out of the way is "chicken".

Here is how you win at chicken.

Before the match you turn up apparently intoxicated. You are sipping a clear liquid from a bottle labelled "vodka". You explain to all who care to listen – and especially to your opponent – that your wife was threatening to leave you and take the children with her. Well you couldn't let that happen so this morning you shot them all. You are now looking forward to joining them in the arms of Jesus.

As the two of you leave for your respective cars you yell in a loud voice:

YIPPIE AI YEY, JEEEESUS HERE I COME!

You are still sipping the clear liquid from the bottle labelled "vodka".

If that doesn’t spook your opponent nothing will.

I suspect there is more than a little of that in the posturing of Khameini's front man, Ahmadinejad. Sometimes it pays to pretend a crazy psychopath is in charge.

But I really don't think Khameini and his fellow thugs will risk vaporisation. When it comes to the mullahs who rule Iran don’t think "holy men," think "collection of gangsters in clerical garb".

One thing though.

I think Obama would find it awkward to go into the 2012 election as the president who let the "crazy mullahs" get nukes

Csteele,

There are a few fundamental differences in your examples, North Korea was delayed by sanctions, but with a totalitarian grip on the people Kim could avoid an up rising. The screws were being tightened on Pakistan, but suddenly the west needed an ally against the Taliban.

Iran has only the card of oil to play, it has alienated its neighbours, and it is already suffering from popular discontent.

My personal view is that it is more vulnerable than the other examples you gave. Mr after dinner jacket might have to choose between the nukes and remaining in power.

Dear Steven,

From my understanding, Iran is developing
nuclear power plants not weponry,
as already exist in Europe
and other countries. Just because Iran is
an Arab country and Israel considers it a
threat everybody is presuming that Iran is
developing nuclear weapons. Israel is reputed
to have nuclear weaponry and they refuse to
deny or confirm it and if Iran were to acquire
nuclear weaponry it would generate a major
catastrophe. It's doubtful whether Iran would
risk self-destruction.

Well Steven, it would be nice to think you are right.
However what if they really believe that a nuclear response would send
them to paradise, or that Allah would stop the retaliatory missile
from working. After all suicide bombers believe all that !

Israel is the threat.Israel has 200 nukes and the means to deliver them.Under the non proliferation treaty, it is Israel that should have sanctions laid against it.

Israel is trying to get the USA to do it's dirty work.It has nothing to do with nukes,but taking the oil just like that did in Iraq.

Foxy,

--Iran is not developing nuclear weaponry.

--George Bush did not have Iraq's oil reserves on his mind when he ordered the invasion of that country.

--Lehman Brothers did not manipulate their balance sheet to hide the parlous state of the company.

--In fact all the world's bankers behaved with the utmost probity in the run up to the global financial meltdown.

--Cigarettes do not cause cancer.

--The Easter bunny exists.

--I have a bridge for sale. Are you interested?

BTW, Iran is not an "Arab country."

Bazz

You have been taken in by Muslim propaganda.

The mullah's who run Iran are not "holy men" ready to sacrifice their lives for the cause and for 72 virgins. They are a mafia of thieving thugs who live very well thank you. They are no more prepared to get vaporised than the old Soviet nomenklatura were willing to sacrifice their dachas to advance communism.

Shadow Minister,

Since the start of the Islamic kleptocracy in 1979 presidents have come and gone. What has remained constant is the mullah mafia that runs the country – initially under Khomeini and since his demise under Khameini. As recent events have shown they are prepared to be as ruthless in maintaining their power as Kim Jong Il in North Korea.

Sanctions will not work so long as China and Turkey go on investing in Iran and buying its oil and gas.

Dear Steven,

You're right. Iran is Aryan!
Maybe that's why it's considered a threat
by its neighbours?

As for your other references.
I need more evidence please? ;-)

The key to peace with Iran is Admiral Mullen{Joint Chiefs of Staff).Relationships between the US Military and Israel have cooled recently.In Aug 2009 and Feb 2010 Mullen has gone to Israel mentioning the US Liberty debacle of 1967 in which Israel carried out a false flag attack trying to sink and kill all the crew of the Liberty and blame it on Egypt,thus getting the USA attack Egypt in the 6 day war.

Just recently Admiral Mullen was asked if he would allow Israeli war plane to use Iraqi air space to attack Iran.Mullen sidestepped the question and alluded to their enduring friendship.Mullen has indicated that Iran is not a nuclear threat and it's invasion will have serious consequences.

So google Admiral Mullen and see his reactions.He is the true barometer of what is happening.

Iran has publicly indicated that it is now refining uranium to 20% U235. While 90%+ is required for weapons, only 5% is required for power generation.

If this is not a precursor for weapons, what is their purpose?

Shadow Minister.Under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty,is Israel allowed to have 200 nuclear weapons?

Foxy wrote:

"As for your other references.
I need more evidence please? ;-)"

Here is a reference:

"Dick Fuld, the former chairman of Lehman Brothers, will on Tuesday deny he knew about Repo 105, the technique the bank used to shift as much as $50bn (£33bn) of liabilities from its balance sheet, and blame a "perfect storm" for the bank's collapse."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/7609007/Dick-Fuld-never-knew-about-Lehmans-controversial-Repo-105-accounting-practices.html

Presumably you don’t believe Dick Fuld when he claims he knew nothing about Lehman Brothers shonky accounting practices.

Presumably you never believed anything Stalin or the Soviet nomenklatura said.

So why would you believe the murderous mullah mafia that runs Iran? Especially when there's ample evidence they ARE working on acquiring nukes?

I think you need to ask yourself some hard questions Foxy.

What is it that makes you take Khameini's puppet, Ahamdinejad, at his word?

Foxy,

Your enemy's enemy is not always your friend. Sometimes he's just another enemy.

And yes, sometimes we have enemies whether we like it or not.

The real danger with Iran acquiring the capability to nuke America is that it will cause Saudi Arabia to lose faith in America's de facto nuclear umbrella. They will feel the need to acquire nukes of their own to protect themselves against Iran just as de Gaulle did to protect France against the possibility of a Soviet invasion.

Then we'll have two countries whose official ideology is a death cult building nuclear arsenals.

People tend to forget that Iran's nuclear program started because they were spooked by Saddam. They originally went the nuclear route to protect themselves against Saddam ruled Iraq.

Yes Steven,and who created Saddham? The good old USA/Israel corporate/political clique,the very oligarchs who murdered him.

Who supported Pol Pot in Cambodia who murdered one million of his own people thus enabling the deaths of two million more via disease and starvation? The good old industrial military complex financed by the banksters.

The moral of the story is that we can be at the receiving end of this murderous mentality if we allow injustice to become the norm.

Dear Steven,

Calm down.

You're reading all sorts of things into
my posts that aren't there.

When I wrote:

"As for your other references. I need
more evidence please." :-)

I was referring to the Easter Bunny and your
claim that he doesn't exist. That's why
I put in the smile, so you'd get it.

My apologies, that I didn't spell it out for you.

Foxy

I did get that you were joking.

But I am serious in asking why you of all people, who would presumably have seen right through any lies emanating from the Soviet regime, are prepared to believe transparent untruths from the Mullah Mafia that runs Iran.

Dear Steven,

Let me answer your question in this way.
As a librarian, I've been trained to look
at more than one source. And the evidence
is not quite as overwhelming as you seem
to believe. According to one website that
I read:

http://news.antiwar.com/2010/04/22/pentagon-claims-iran-continues-nuclear-weapons-program/

According to this website the Pentagon claims have no evidence
attached and they're guilty of "sensationalism."

The website tells us that:

"Iran's been working to expand their civilian nuclear
program for quite some time and it is this program which
is being cited excluisvely in the claims about Iran's
non-existent "nuclear weapons," ambitions. Yet the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) continues to
verify the non-diversion of nuclear materials from this
program, and none of this uranium is bein enriched beyond
20%, with most only being enriched to 3.5%.
Nuclear weapons, to compare, would require 90+% enriched
uranium..."

"This report also speculates about Iran trying to develop
long range missiles that could hit the US, something
Iranian officials insist they aren't even considering.

Currently the best Iranian missiles have a range limited to
the MIddle East and a tiny portion of SE Europe, and the
ability to literally cross half the planet to hit the
continental US would be an enormous undertaking...
Even the Pentagon concludes that Iran would not lunch
a pre-emptive attack for fear of retaliation.

It therefore does seem ridiculous to imagine that Iran
would commit so much of their limited resources to such
a long-range offensive weapon..."

Read the website. It just may give you a different
perspective on things.

Foxy wrote:

"From my understanding, Iran is developing
nuclear power plants not weponry,..."

Trying to figure out what states do always involves a degree of speculation. Usually you cannot prove something is true beyond all reasonable doubt. Usually you need to do certain amount of connecting the dots.

Now, given the NATURE OF THE IRANIAN REGIME and the following facts:

--They continue to devote huge resources to developing the capability to enrich uranium to weapons grade.

--They are known to have enriched uranium beyond the point that is needed for electricity generation though not up to weapons grade

--They are developing missiles which are capable of delivering nuclear warheads – though not as yet to the US

--The ability of the IAEA to monitor their activities is doubtful which makes their "non diversion" statement of little value. And, of course, they may not have diverted any uranium YET.

It is thus beyond doubt that they continue to devote huge resources to developing the CAPABILITY TO DEPLOY NUKES.

Have they actually taken the decision to assemble nukes yet?

I don’t know. There is no way anyone can know. But given the capabilities they are developing we have to act AS IF they were going to take that final step.

But here is my question to you Foxy. It is one you need to think about carefully.

If it were Stalin saying "What, me develop nukes? All I want is nuclear power to benefit the proletariat." you would dismiss his protestations of innocence with CONTEMPT. You would say we have to treat a Stalinist regime in Iran's position as if it were about to acquire nukes.

But you are prepared to give the Murderous Mullah Mafia (MMM) that runs Iran the BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.

I find that interesting to say the least. I wonder why you are prepared to give MMM the benefit of the doubt.

The question of what we do about it is another matter. As I said, I think the MMM can be deterred just as were Stalin and his successors

Congress has just voted 400 to 11 to bring harsh sanctions on Iran.All this will do is increase tensions and pave the way for a serious conflict.Israel is pushing for this via their powerful lobbly group AIPAC.In my view they virtually control Congress.

Iraq was a lie and so is the threat of Iran.It is all about the oil.

Dear Steven,

It is the International Atomic Energy Agency
that as I cited in my earlier post, continues
to verify the non-diversion of nuclear materials
from Iran's program... And as the agency quite
clearly stated none of the uranium is being
enriched beyond 20%, with most only being enriched
to 3.5%. Nuclear weapons, to compare, would require
90+ percent enriched uranium...

I'm somewhat perplexed why you insist on connecting
the wrong dots. Iran has no water, wind, they're looking
for alternative means to generate power - give them a chance
to prove themselves. As Richard Dawkins tells us in
"The God Delusion, " there is a dark side to absolutism.
The Christians who blow up abortion clinics, the Taliban of
Afghanistan, whose list of cruelties, especially to women,
is far too long to mention here. Iran under the ayatollahs,
or Saudi Arabia under the Saud princes, or the American
"rapture" Christians whose powerful influence on American
Middle-Eastern policy is governed by their biblical belief
that Israel has a God-given right to all the lands of Palestine.
Some rapture Christians go further and actually yearn
for nuclear war because they interpret it as "Armageddon'
which, according to their bizarre but disturbingly popular
interpretation of the book of Revelation, will hasten the
Second coming..."

Blaming Iran for it's religion - you may as well look at
the bigger picture - and blame all the various religious
examples that Dawkins cites. You quote Stalin - how
about Tony Blair and George W. Bush? What about the
problems in Africa and South America? You're tending
to focus on Muslims that hypothetically appear to be a threat,
to Israel. The threat to Israel will come from within
by their own doing. Already world governments are questioning
Israel's actions.

I shan't be responding to anything further on this topic.
No matter how provocative you will be. As I don't see
anything constructive coming out of this discussion.
Your mind is made up - so there's nothing more to be
said.

Arjay,

"Under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty,is Israel allowed to have 200 nuclear weapons?"

Firstly: while Iran was signatory to the treaty Israel was not.

Secondly, while it is widely believed that Israel has nukes, as they were not subject to the inspection regimes, the number or nukes, (or even if they have any) is largely conjecture.

Finally, if Israel has 200 nukes, this simply raises the risk that Israel will deploy them. Israel could never have got away with using nukes against non Nuke countries unless facing military obliteration, now the first strike to destroy Iran's nukes (using nukes) is a likely and quasi legitimate scenario. Given that Iran continually threatens to obliterate Israel.

A few facts:

Iran has signed the non-proliferation treaty and has no nuclear weapons.

Israel has not signed the non-proliferation treaty and does have nuclear weapons.

Iran threatens to attack.

Israel does it, repeatedly with impunity.

Very strange.

Stan, Arjay

I suggest you both buy bicycles.