Thank you, I appreciate the compliment.
Welcome. I just hope you are not a JBeuk puppet pretending to be someone else...
Sounds like nukes are a pretty big trump card, if we're that concerned about Iran getting its hands on them.
No doubt, they make a country invulnerable to an attack, like NK.
Honestly I'm far more concerned about Russian reaction to any attack than to Iran's response.
Why should you? Russia and Iraq were FAR closer than they are to iran, and iraq owed russia a ton of money - and even forgave most of the debt after the US invasion...
While they may not attack the US or Israel directly, they have the ability to wreak havoc in many places - think Georgia, for starters.
At a low level yes, just as they helped hezbollah in lebanon locate several israeli spy cells recently, so the russians can be a problem if you are not prepared for them, but they would not even consider something major...
And while China needs us, we need them just as much.
After china has poisoned our food, dog food, murdered our children with defective toys, and provided tainted plasterboard for our homes, the US public can be easily swayed to stop buying chinese-made product. The 2 countries have a close trading relationship, but there are other countries very eager to build factories to export their wares to us...
In the event of an attack on Iran by the US and/or its ally Israel, do you suppose $2 trillion in notes will keep China from sticking its nose in, or worse, loosening the leash on N Korea?
LOL, not if they want to be paid back, they won't.
Maybe or maybe not, it depends on how badly they need the Iranian oil at that given time and what other sources of revenue (markets) they have at hand.
You do not understand how treasurys work, China has ALREADY bought them, it isn't a question of whether they will buy them or not - they already have them in their central bank registry account.
Like the two shooting wars already on our hands and the Iranian allies and neighbors who could (would) be drawn into the fight - most of them nuclear themselves. Why is now the best time to start WWIII?
You must not have read the General's article, re-read it again. An iranian campaign would require the use of assets not currently deployed in quantity, namely the Navy and Air Force.
Two points here. First, there has been little to no diplomacy between the US and Iran for 30 years. There have been no diplomatic relations since the 1979 overthrow of the Shah.
There have been many, many attempts in prior administrations, particularly during Clinton's 2 terms, and he was humiliated by them more than once...
On the occasions we need to speak with the Iranians, contacts must be handled through the Swiss.
Not always.....
As for the diplomacy that has occurred, remember the offers by M. Khatami in 2001-2002 for comprehensive dialogue leading to normalization fo relations? Those offers were rejected in the runup to the Iraq war. That rebuff arguably led directly to the loss of influence among Khatami and the reformists, paving the way for the selection of Ahmadinejad.
#1, they were not considered genuine at the time, and probably weren't, and cannot possibly be considered the reason why Khatami was no re-elected. #2, the iranians did not elect him again because he failed to accomplish the freedom-driven reforms they expected and desired.
Second, depending on the source estimates for an Iranian nuclear device range from the six to 12 months you quote to no program being in place. The fact is, we simply do not know. Scary in itself, but not justification for the type of urgency you are espousing.
They are blocking the inspections required by the IAEA, and wouldn't be unless they had something to hide.
You make two big assumptions here. The first is that the Arab nations are all alike. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I know that, having lived in a few for over 20 years...but all sunnis hate the shia, and that is a fact regardless of arab muslim nation.
The second is that Arab leaders could privately rejoice while publicly assuaging the street with a little finger-wagging at an ascendant, nuclear Israel bombing a neighbor. The enemy of their enemy is not necessarily their friend, especially where Israel is concerned. And dictators have no goal more important than the security of their own positions - especially in the Arab nations, where many are battling religious extremist movements.
If you remember in the 2006 israeli-hezbollah skirmish, SA and Egypt issued strong statements AGAINST hezbollah, and recenltly, Egypt broke up a hezbollah cell inside the sinai. These are the 2 most important arab nations, and both detest iran, and have poor relations with iran at best. Even if both changed leadership tomorrow, Egypt and SA would be enemies of iran, that would not change. Anyone claiming otherwise does not know the middle east.
We do not know how much time we have, nor do we know what effect the shakeup in their nuclear program has had. Reminds me of the leadup to Iraq, where for whatever reason (and that's a different thread) the intelligence we were given on WMDs turned out to be false.
There were reports by some 20 intelligence services that saddam had them, shit he'd already used them on the kurds, so it wasn't exactly a stretch...
We would do well to verify, not to mention see who emerges victorious in the current effort to overthrow the regime, before making or backing yet another "preemptive" invasion. Those who do not learn from history...
#1, since they are blocking inspections, and have spread their acknowledged program across the country, and deep underground in hardened facilities which leads one to believe that they are hiding aspects of the program that would not be wise. Second, again, we do not have the luxury of time to "wait out" and see if the opposition can depose the current regime.
Not all relationships are black and white, especially in the ME. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are hardly Iran's "arch-enemies",
LOL, uh yes they are, you need to learn more about the middle east my friend. Statements like this are telling...
in Saudi's case they are partners within OPEC with a common interest economically and in Egypt's case they are frenemies within the Non-Aligned movement with common political interests. Do they trust each other? No, but then again neither do Iran and Russia. Doesn't mean they won't stick together in pursuit of other national interests while arming themselves to the teeth in case of the worst.
SA' and Egypt's programs are directly in response to iran's, in fact, SA and iran have minimal diplomatic relations. I think it was only a few months ago that when AN showed up there, that it was many years since ANY high-ranking iranian official has stepped foot on SA soil.
POLITICS: A Thaw in Egypt-Iran Relations? - IPS ipsnews.net
"The recent visit to the Egyptian capital by a high-level Iranian official has reignited speculation about the state of Egyptian-Iranian diplomatic relations, officially frozen since 1979. Ali Larijani, head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, is the highest ranking Iranian official to visit Egypt in the last 27 years."
Things were looking a tiny bit better until the hez' terrorists were caught in the sinai, plotting against the Mubarak gov't...
Saudi Arabia-Iran Relations | IranTracker
"As an ally of the United States, Saudi Arabia’s relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran have been relatively strained since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Despite common membership to international organizations such as OPEC and NAM—Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and the Non-Aligned Movement—and similar economies based on oil resources, Saudi Arabia and Iran have often found themselves in economic and political competition. During the Iran-Iraq War 1980-1988, Saudi Arabia supported Saddam Hussein against Iran.[8] In recent years, relations have been particularly strained as Saudi Arabia has publicly questioned the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program."
