Comments on: Iran to Go Nuclear in One Year?

By: ExiledIndependent

ExiledIndependent — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:01:58 +0000

Is this a cultural thing that my Western mind can’t grasp? Because it feels suspiciously like Saddam Hussein’s behavior before the U.S. invaded–appear as a threat, albeit a vague one, even if you aren’t.

By: Jim S

Jim S — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 19:28:27 +0000

They’re also right next to a nuclear-armed Pakistan whose parliament has a new majority two-party coalition, half of which is comprised of muslim fundamentalist.

Huh? This is completely inaccurate. Neither one of the two parties that form the new coalition is a religious party. They are both secular parties that were (until Bhutto’s assassination) led by former prime ministers of the country. Neither of those leaders are/were saints. Both of them found themselves trying to deal with the Muslim fundamentalists and often in hopelessly naive ways that were sure to come back and bite them. But neither party is islamist.

By: Jimmy the Dhimmi

Jimmy the Dhimmi — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:55:41 +0000

I am also for directly engaging in talks with Iran via diplomatic channels rather than a leader to leader summit
We are doing that. The IAEA, and the European Union are diplomatic channels that we convey our interests through, and they convey theirs. I agree that we cannot have official negotiations with an apocalyptic regime like Iran, but Obama disagrees with us. I’m guessing he will be the president when Iran gets the bomb.

The moral of this story: Anti-Bush people should not get so jumpy when other anti-bush career CIA guys publish reports in the NIE that Iran is not a threat to obtain nuclear weapons, based on weak evidence obtained from one intercepted phone call in 2003.

Becuase of that, I hate to say it Dyre, but the military option is off the table, at least if Obama wins. Who knows, we might see the lame duck authorize a surgical strike before he leaves office if Obama wins in November - and that might not be a bad thing.

By: Bubbles

Bubbles — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 14:26:18 +0000

They’re also right next to a nuclear-armed Pakistan whose parliament has a new majority two-party coalition, half of which is comprised of muslim fundamentalist. So in the end, Musharraf will probably be ousted and replaced by someone slightly friendlier to Islamic extremists. Not saying Musharaff was great, but he’s better than what could come. My biggest fear is that Iran with its already mobile nuclear program could bribe Pakistan to hand over the final technologies needed to go nuclear. Of course, in this election year the news media is focusing on supposed romantic relationships with lobbyists and alleged plagiarism in speeches… so until something bad happens nobody’s going to care.