Quote:
Originally Posted by zraver
Take awa thier ability to threaten and put them under punishing sanctions until they clean up thier act.
|
Zraver,
At the risk of preaching to the choir, sanctions will not do it alone.
However, though military action in the forms articulated might set back their nuclear ambitions, it will not take away their abililty to threaten us, our alliances or their neighboors.
It will not, if we are to use Iraq as a case study, advance the interests of the United States in either a polilcy relevant or long term time frame.
Quote:
|
You don't manage nuclear weapons states.
|
I may have slept through some of the last almost 40 years of my own reccollection, but, IIRC, managing nuclear weapons states has been a staple of U.S. foreign policy since the days of my father before me.
Quote:
|
The United States has a track record of failing to at agressively enough to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. If we would act soon enough, we would not have to lock ourselvess intoan endless and ultimately insustainable seige of forgien countries far form our border.
|
An insustainable seige of foreign countries far from our borders was good enough for Ronald Reagan (though smart money knew the Sovs were going to collapse in ten years anyway regardless of what Reagan did).
Quote:
|
In the final estiamte, it is better to have Iran dissove than to have the Middle East consumed by nucelar warfare.
|
A failed Iran will do no more for the U.S. than will a failed Iraq.
What evidence do you submit that the Middle East will be consumed by nuclear warfare if the United States does not bomb Iran?
Quote:
|
If we don't act evnetually Israel will and then the gloves are off. Israel with far les sin terms of capability may well go nuclear first under the principle that its better to ask forgiveness than permission.
|
This thing in Iran is much too important to leave to the Israelis, the Europeans or anybody else.
Every major policy interest of the United States in the Middle East and Central Asia at this time and for the foresseable future is tied to the Iranians. We cannot have other Powers of any color, stripe or capability dictating the solution to our problem in this matter.
If Israel launches the first nuclear strike in the Middle East then I fully endorse the United States mounting the second: airburst a B83 dialled towards maximum a few miles over Tel Aviv simultaneously with a B83 laid down at a low to medium yield on the Temple Mount accompanied by a B83 assembled at maximum yield several miles above Jerusalem. Simultaneous dismantling of Israeli assets outside of thier borders to be implemented as scheduling permits.
It is vital to the fate of this Republic that other Powers not **** this up for us; we can create a good God damned sheer distilled purple poisoned goat **** by an electric green donkey dick from outer space easily enough on our own throwing an uncalled for tantrum and smashing things without their help and they ought to be put on notice.
The next President of the United States of needs to make it a plank that the White House, despite previous management, is not an outhouse for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, or HM's Foreign Office, for that matter.
Quote:
|
I would say the same to you. This is not an issue that jsut cropped up with us hawkish types yelling Havoc, and let slip the dogs of war.
|
Yeah, I have been thinking about it for the last 20 years.
Quote:
|
This issue has been building for years, and each day Iran not only gets closer to real capability but has one more day to harden thier assets agaisnt attack making any eventual miltiary action less sure of sucess with every passing day.
|
Some years before OIF, after ODS, there was a pretty informed opinion that the United States did not possess the intelligence or strike assets to deliver the policy goals of WMD counter proliferation via the mechanism of military adventurism. Guy made a good case.
OIF bore this out.
As it stands, the proven odds of success of military action in a counter proliferation role seems to lag the proven track record of other offsets.
Why reinvent strategic failure when you may be able to manuever to strategic success?
Quote:
|
I dissage, I and many other observers fele the Norks would ahve fallen apart with out fuel and food given by the west that kept the army fit and in control. They didn't have nukes then, they do now, way to go Bubba.
|
I was reffering to Libya, not North Korea.
Quote:
|
Act now while we still can might be the best one.
|
Contradicts the admonition of Jomini, methinks, and he was a pimpy cat.
Quote:
|
Hrmmm, so whats Germany and Japan?
|
Germany and Japan are partial exceptions to the rule and even then at significant expenditure of resources (though I fully approve).
However, given the facts of the 20'th Century attempts at nation building, duplicating the same feat in Iraq is at best case a 4:1 proposition and those are not exactly the best odds.
[quote]I would say the US has as often been a proponent of Democrac as it has been an instrument of tyranny. Which is sad enough for America, bit now time is better than now than to turn over a new leaf and really start advocating rule by the people for the people, and of the people.
Quote:
|
Bush had some great ideas, the problem is he couldn't find his a s s with both hands and a road map.
|
He thought he could talk Wilson and act Johnson/Nixon. It sounded funny at the time so there was no incentive to buy it.
Quote:
|
Arguing original sin is pointless. No one in the American or Iranian goverments is still around. In 1979 the US was not assisitng the Shah in maintaining power, but iran sur ehad no problem attacking the US and blaiming
|
How many members of the Pasadran and their families do you suppose, prior to the Revolution, so you think fell afoul of the U.S. backed Shah's SAVAK?
Don't you think that might affect their judgement, at least a little bit?
Why reinforce bad taste?
Quote:
|
Washington has bene opposing Iran, supporting the GCC for decades now. Washingotn might not be able to remember where yesterday's crisis was or why it was, but it never ever forgets where oil comes from.
|
I was under the impression that this had nothing to do with oil
.
Quote:
|
Only to a point, despite Iraq I trust the CIA to be able to monitor industrial scale nuclear activity.
|
Naturally; they would not act if they did not have a slam dunk case.
Quote:
|
Starving French peasants did pretty good, starvation will not stop a revolt although it might spark one. When starvation is used as a weapon the critical ingrediant is a different ethinic/cultural group willing to enforce the starvation on the targeted group.
|
Those starving French peasants did pretty good with what interested, foreign parties supplied them.
Those parachutes carried mana from Hartford, et al., not mana from Heavan.
Quote:
|
Thier neighbors do not pose a credible threat lacking all but the most rudimentary offensive capabilties.
|
To the East: a country whom has executed than one diplomat and been opposed. Has a new government that was elected with and maintains power with the help of a hostile Power.
To the Southeast: a country of questionable stability with nuclear arms, delivery systems and a hotbed of ideologically opposed radicals.
A short flight across the gulf to the Southwest, there is a power that is vehemently, ideologically opposed state who has actively worked on Iranian flanks and against Iranian interests.
To the West: Iran shares a border with a state who has made war on them in the past with the aid of another Power, the same Power who is threatening their interests there now and propping up the place.
To the North: Iran's neighboor has nuclear weapons and a proven track record of designs on their territory and welfare.
It is foolish and intellectually disingenous to think that the Iranians do not percieve a threat.
Quote:
|
A Line in the sand bacled by resolute action is very effective. If some one like Bush 41 was in office Iran would be singing a very different tune. If Bush 43 hadn't bungled Iraq, Iran would likely be singing a different tune.
|
Bush 41's adults have spoken their piece to the children.
A much better crowd; I liked them then and I like them now.
Quote:
|
I think alot of what they are doing is bluffing. If they can get from A to G then have to make concessions taking them back to E they still gain
|
Yep, and they will probably get away with it.
Quote:
|
and just as often- Open your damn eyes
|
They are open; why do you think I say what I say?
Quote:
|
Which is what I percive Iran doing as we debate, the problem is of course is to get Iran out of that corner we will track pain across the kitchen floor.
|
The client and the contractor might consult on the kitchen remodeling plan.
Quote:
|
We are dealing with elected polticians and clerics, neither class is well know for adequate risk assesment, or genuine concern for those they govern/rule.
|
Military juntas and other unelected idiots have not demonstrated much concern, either.
I have heard it said that "the first lord is never the first servant".
Quote:
|
Its not one dimensional at all. Iran will either be moved by gold (the loss of it, the gain of it, or the promise of it) or blood (the loss of threatened loss of it). All magor international crisises are solved with either blood, gold, or both.
|
Wrong.
You are failing to account for Jomini.
The 42'nd President discredited the former and the 43'rd President thoroughly discredited the latter. Which do you favor?
Quote:
I dunno, do you think Churchill was wrong for preaching the coming of the Iron Curtain? Was he just out to sway the masses? I think your tryign to trvilaize the military option by understatign the level of threat Iran poses.
my .02
|
Of course Mr. Churchill was grandstanding!
Five or ten people in the hundred saw the Iron Curtain coming years before the Fulton speech.
Mr. Churchill had his own strategic concerns and wanted to have U.S. support to offset them.
Churchill needed to scare and agitate people because 90 to 95 scared and agitated people in a hundred are how you manipulate democracy, not five or ten calm, rational, educated people...that kind of turnout will get you nowhere and you should not even bother to court them; focus groups and polls are much more useful when articulating policy aims.
Regards,
William