Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnought
In my opinion they all say they would do whatever. Would they really? Or just say that until faced with the matter at hand. How many would flip/flop such as the with Iraq vote AFTER it gets all the political strings tied behind the military's back and we have what we have now. A strong capable military being held back by backroom political favors and dealings by those whose supposedly desire change. How many would change their minds when it becomes unpopular? So far the only one who has carried through despite the worldwide unpopularity is Bush. Think these canidates can stomache that or turn tail and bolt like Murtha suggests.  |
Iran is a natural island. In the region, its a minority in race, language, and religion. Only 20 years ago it fought in one of the bloodiest wars of the 20th century, against an alliance of Arab states. Even outside the region few are especially comfortable with nuclear-armament (with the possible exception of Russia - see Richardson*).
So there would be no need for backroom dealings, as I see it. A plain-sight bilateral resolution which allows Iran to continue down its path of nuclear power without arming itself would be face-saving for both Iran
and the US. And, despite its recent efforts to leverage the Palestine issue, Iran still hasn't won over any Arabs.