amazing... instead of worrying what would happen in retaliation, you worry about the "ecological disaster"..

I was addressing Perham. From his POV it could be that a bigger and deadlier retaliation is better.

And obviously it could devolve into out and out war followed be regime change.

However the Iranians seem more able to put themselves back together and I think we've learned our lesson in Iraq about trying to give people full democratic freedoms. I'd hope we'd keep it to a pure air/artillary war.

Really I just wish Iran would knock it off with the arming of extremists and wanting to get nukes and just join the world. They don't even like Al-Queda.

Then why did you support Saddam while he was fighting Iran?

I believe USA won't have the money or the balls to wage new wars. The war in Iraq proved to be a disaster, both politically and financially (only few men made profit, those same guys that convinced the US public opinion that this war was necessary).

Why should USA attack Iran? Because Iran wants to develop a nuke, huh? So what? North Korea happens to be much more "evil" regime that Iranian one, yet they made a nuke and what? Did they use it? No. Will they use it? I don't think so. But they gained freedom from US pressure. That is the exact same thing Iran is trying to achieve: get freedom from pressure and negotiate on equal basis with the rest of the world, and, last but not least, assure its safety.

1. Nobody can ignore Iran - a successor to Persia, a great empire you Yanks have a lot to learn from
2. Iran is not Iraq - you Yanks will be seeing much more metal coffins and your politicians will have to explain the reason for that

So, let them be. Leave Iran alone. If you attack it - you will be seeing one more Vietnam. This is one war American Jews are trying to impose and they are desperately fighting to convince US public opinion of its necessity. Reject that and everything will be just fine.

__________________
Devil and the deep blue sea behind me
Vanish in the air, you'll never find me
I will turn your face to alabaster
Then you will find your servant is your master

Wrapped around your finger - The Police

My suggestion: Iranian government should use all resources available and buy the newest Russian anti-aircraft systems like S-300 or S-400.





Nobody will dare attack Iran in that case.

__________________
Devil and the deep blue sea behind me
Vanish in the air, you'll never find me
I will turn your face to alabaster
Then you will find your servant is your master

Wrapped around your finger - The Police

Oh, they're trying of course. So far Russia is only giving out the slightly older short range stuff though
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...E85D6FF18B.htm

I don't know about the nobody daring thing. Faced with a very real prospect of getting nuked and the nearly certain prospect of being attacked directly or indirectly conventionally/via terrorists by a country with a nuclear deterrent I think Israel may be willing to go to extreme measures and lose quite a number of weapons or aircraft to take that reactor down.

Also, tactically, the reactor has a real problem. It is located right on the coast of the persian gulf. Meaning it could be hit with almost no warning.

Of course their centerfuges are in a much more defensible location.


At any rate it's obvious why Iran would want a nuclear weapon. That's part of why nobody believes they don't want one.

Now, I don't think it was a good idea to let N Korea get nuclear weapons either.

But Iran would be notably worse as Korea doesn't really have an agenda besides wanting to get handouts from it's neighbors. Annoying, but I don't see them using a nuke. Nor do I see them attempting to wage a land war all of a sudden.

Iran however is a different case. They've proven willing to support their own terrorist elements in the region, and have expressed the desire to wipe Israel off the map. Even if they aren't launching nukes there will be more conventional warfare if we allow Iran to get nuclear weapons.

Honestly, do you believe differently Amused?

...........................................nuff said

i dont think iran would use a nuke even if they got one. i know about ahmadinejads beliefs, but i think they want it for leverage. the US has never invaded a country with nukes. can you imagine what would happen if iran buked our troops in their own country? the libs would be going off the walls calling for a withdrawl. its clear that a nuke would sereve as a much better political weapon. also, if all else fails, they can always sell it for a crazy ammount of money. a nuke is almost priceless. i wouldnt be surprized if it would sell for $100 billion or maybe even more. and thats probably a cheap price concidering how much it costs to even get one.

Um. Neither of those scenarios is a good thing you realize?

Selling a nuke is....I shouldn't even have to explain that.

And for the defensive angle I don't think they want one "just because" they know they are currently and will be in the future doing things that result in US and Israeli deaths. The more the better as far as they're concerned. This is not something we want to grant them.

i dont think that its the iranian people that we have to worry about. its just the regime. but its not like ahmadinejad is popular.. i think he has a lower approval rating then bush in the US. most iranians are moderate in their beliefs and they care about their well being. they know that if ahmadinejad does anything with a nuke, theyre going to live in the poorest country for the next 1000 years. he knows that too. if he does anything that jeapordizes the well-being of the whole country, hes going to be found at the end of a long rope.

I don't think many people feel that he's going to just launch a missile. If he uses a nuke it'll be through something like extremists somehow seize one so it isn't his responsibility. Or something otherwise covert, like firing from a sub.

No I think the practical threat is that once he has a nuclear deteret he'll feel free to do all sorts of conventional attacks cover or overtly. Or possibly sell the technoloy.