Iran-WAR!!! Perhaps/Georgia-Maybe

Rvr,

I'm sure you mean well, but do you really want to see a Nuclear Iran?

I agree that war, somebody's war, with Iran may be inevitable, but I doubt the USA will be the one who starts it. And once it starts, I don't think it will last 72 hours.

Iran is an emerging nuclear power who thinks Hitler had a good, but poorly implimented idea.  That is, the total destruction of the Jewish people, and by implication, Israel itself.  A nuclear Iran just might have the wherewithall to accomplish what the WWII Nazis failed to do.  However, I really doubt the Israelis will sit still and see those Iranian nukes come to fruition.

Hint, hint, look for lots of smoke over Teheran when the Israelis get a little more worried, they've already done it once, I see nothing to stop them from acting in their own best interests again.

[Rvrwind]

Sorry if I offended you, but to answer your question, NO, I don't want to see Iran with a nuclear weapon. Hell I don't like the fact that Russia & the US or anybody else has nuclear weapons. In my opinion none of them are responsible enough or can be trusted not to use them. I do however feel they have the right just as every other country in the world to build a nuclear power station to aleviate their dependence on fossil fuels. As long as they don't enrich the uranium themselves & they are a far cry from being able to achieve that.

That seems to be where the confusion lays. They are not building nuclear weapons, at least they weren't & were not intending to & a a far cry from having the technology to. Russia even stepped up & offered a solution to the whole mess & that was to allow Russia to enrich the uranium for the power station to the standard required but not beyond & the standard for a power station is far below that for a nuclear weapon & would be totally useless as a weapon.

All I see is the west once again stepping in & lying through their teeth to achieve their own goals. Had the US accepted the deal Russia was discussing with Iran this would be a mute point. Most world leaders saw it as a viable solution that would keep everybody happy, Tehran would get there nuclear powerplant working & the west could be assured they were not enriching uranium to build a bomb.

However the US rejected this senario & pissed of Tehran in so doing & now we are at a crossroads. I only see the US once again pulling their big brother bullsh!tt to increase tension in the world. You really think that if the US bombs Iran as they did Iraq it will end there. I submit it will not. Look at the uprising going on over a few cartoon caricatures. If that can cause such a provocation exactly how far do you think they will go if the US bombs Iran. It didn't happen over Iraq because Saddam Insane was't well liked anyway, but Iran is a different ballgame.

There is a peaceful solution but the west doesn't even want to entertain it & that makes me wonder who's pockets will be filled with gold when the smoke clears. You also must consider one other very important detail...if they bomb Bashier the nuclear fallout will cover parts of Pakistan, Georgia & one other country whose name I can't recall at the moment. What excuse do we give them for creating another Chernobyl on their territories & irradiating half their populations, Ooops!!!

Iran is not Iraq & all their bluster & poise is not going to win them any friends but I also submit that neither will the US when it won't even discuss a possible peaceful solution. In fact they may just succeed in making more enemies.

The peaceful solution is there, everybody can have what they want, take it for crying out loud & quit trying to bully the world into what you consider to best for everybody. In effect its no different than Islam, just a different name.

Besides my distaste for governments you will note I have no liking for religion either, any friggin' religion. Thats just so you don't think I'm promoting one or the other.

RVR

[ronin308]

Rvr it might be of interest to note several things:

The US is not the only one who made the referal to the security council.  While Europe sees the Russian alternative as an option they have recently become disconcerted over the delay in negotiations. 

Russia is a member of the IAEA board and even they voted for sending the resolution. 

Additionally if you search the IAEA site you'll find documents from countries other than the US all reflecting a vote of no confidence in Iran.  For example on 1/12/2006  the E3 (Germany,UK and France) sent a document requesting that the matter be sent to the security council.

As to the US supporting or not supporting Russia's plan, this is a nice quote from the BBC:

Mr Bush said: "I think that is a good plan. The Russians came up with the idea and I support it... because I do believe people ought to be allowed to have civilian nuclear power."

The US didn't "reject" the proposal and weren't the only ones who sent this to the security council so stop blaming just the US or even the west.  Even Russia who had the option to abstain from the vote, voted to send the proposal to the security council. 

Part of the problem is that Iran is continuing to take steps forward even while "negotiating" with Russia so it is possible that the whole thing was a stalling tactic on the Iranians part.

[Rvrwind]

Part of the problem is that Iran is continuing to take steps forward even while "negotiating" with Russia so it is possible that the whole thing was a stalling tactic on the Iranians part.

A deffinite Possibility.

I know the nogotiations fell apart in Moscow just before the IAEA was to meet & give their rcommendations.

This statement by Bush, I never saw before & if this was/is his stance on the matter then I commend him for at least trying to be civil.

My biggest concern is that this won't end as quickly as every one thinks. It won't be a fly in bomb the plant & split, I wish it were that simple. These people are fanatical nutjobs & Iran is a kinda icon for them. I wish they in fact would come to their senses & realize that they can avoid open war by merely accepting Russia's offer.

It all pretty much boils down to them now. The rest of the world has given them the terms & they must decide if they are willing to sacrifice the lives of thousands of their 'Holy Warriors' or accept a peaceful solution. My concern also lays with the nearby countries to where the plant is located & who are not involved, just innocent bystanders who will no matter what happens recieve the nuclear fallout. How do we protect them?

Its also a fact that Iran will retaliate, big time & the problem that most goverments are not seeing or that most seem to close their eyes to is that there are millions of these people all over the world, in every country. The riots & such over some cartoons are proof of that. Its just plain downright scary & I would as much as possible like to avoid it.

RVR

[BC]

Not taking sides here..

I think the crux of the matter is that the rest of the world wants to be able to 'control' the fuel input/output for Iran.

Iran says I have fuel in my back yard.. why not be able to process it myself... They don't want to be dependent on outside political interests.

US and other countries want not only control of fuel for reasons of nuclear proliferation but political control as well.

RU of course would also like to also make money on the deal.

Iran prior to everyone wanting to press the matter allowed IAEA random inspections.  Don't forget IAEA is not an independent organization and is controlled by political forces.

It's all politics with a little bit of money thrown in that unfortunately smells all around.  There are logical ways to resolve the issue peacefully but it's kind of difficult to grasp them in a pile of muck.

[ronin308]

Rvr, I wholeheartedly agree that should a military response be used it will not be an easy in out solution and like our invasion of Iraq would probably end up moving down the path of losing the war on terrorism.  I also don't think that sanctions are a good idea but we have to come up with some way of dealing with the situation.

I also heard that the negotiations had chilled a bit because of some of the Russian requirements that Iran considered non-negotiable.  I'm not sure if they were items that could have been resolved or not.

BC, anything controlled by governments is political in nature.  It's one of the reason that I dislike government in the first place.

If you read the E3 statement sent to the IAEA the statement continued to reiterate what everyone has been saying which is that they have no problem with countries creating a nuclear power program, they simply do not have confidence in Iran and it's government to do the right thing when it comes to nuclear materials.  This is a consistent message being spread by most of the governments in the world.

Iran has done nothing to allay the fears of the world that the fuel would not end up being used in a bomb.  Even low enriched fuel can be used to make a dirty bomb which would have some nasty effects. 

So of course this is about controlling the fuel as that is the portion that can be used in a weapon.   If the control rods where the problem for example then the focus would be on them. 

Finally remember we are dealing with a government who based on his statements is marching lock step with Hilter only he thinks Islam is the master race. 

[Bruce]

When our military intelligence (hope its not an oxymoron) finds that Iran is close to a nuclear weapon we ought to "ask" the Israeli comandos to go in an level them -  just like they did when Iraq supposedly got close to the bomb way back when. 

[BC]

Ronin,

Dirty bombs can be built in just about any country that has radiological material including those used in medical devices.. I'm sure Iran has such material in abundance..  they don't need uranium for this.  They could have blown one up yesterday.

I'm pretty sure that if Iran is not intent on building weapons with highly enriched material IAEA could monitor production and use on site and would agree to dispose of used rods in another country.

I'm not taking sides with Iran and agree their political PR has raised hairs on many countries necks.

It's kind of catch22 anyway.. once they have a working reactor there isn't a country in the world that will go in and blow the sucker up.

[ronin308]

BC, the problem with simply using the IAEA monitoring as a solution is that as you say once the reactor is built there isn't a way to stop them.

With the Russian solution at least the flow of new materials could be cutoff if they were found in violation. 

I understand that they want to be independant but in light of the fact that very few governments have confidence in the Iranian government doing the right thing, the simple fact is that they can't.  The only governments supporting them currently are those with nothign to lose in the first place.

If they are willing to think globally then they will accept a compromise, however in light of many things going on now they are not willing to accept anything short of our capitulation on the matter.