Iran
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashleykennedy";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildbore";p="
I agree that military options should be on the table, and not removed until there is proof of Iran's complaince.
I can't find a link but I think Iran was going to comply with UN resolutions by placing cameras in their underground facilities. I heard this on either BBC or CBC. Hopefully this is true because it would be a relief to the world to find out what Iran is doing.
|
Does the US have the military capability for use against Iran. Yes the US could bomb Iran but what affect would that have in Iraq? Could the US invade Iran, I doubt it?
The IAEA has cameras inside the Natanz facility. The cameras are immaterial as it is what Iran proposes to do with the enriched uranium that is important. Is it for electric production or bombs. Has Iran resurected the US plan to build 23 Nuclear power station or is Iran a threat to stability in the ME? Not that there is stability in the ME at the moment.
Iran is still a long way off having a capability to make a bomb. For the moment the military option is a waste of time. |
Keeping the military option on the table has the potential of saving time later on.
I think it would be stupid to bomb Iran in the near future myself, but policy makers must have all options prepared just in the case something unfortunate transpires.
__________________
"The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. " — John Stuart Mill
|