The topic is bound to come up in looming talks that officials from the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China will have with representatives of Iran.
Unfortunately, as French President Nicolas Sarkozy pointed out last week at a meeting of the U.N. Security Council on nuclear proliferation, years of gradually stronger sanctions against Iran for ignoring that body’s to stop enriching uranium have only led to “more enriched uranium, more centrifuges” for enriching it, and a vow to “wipe a U.N. member [Israel] off the map.”
That history shows that more talk will only lead to more talk while Iran forges ahead.
With or without the help of Russia and China, however, the U.S. and European nations, must meet Iranian defiance head on with severe economic sanctions.
The time for talking should be past.
I am not sure exactly what they think sanctions are going to accomplish. Iran has been sanctioned for years, and as the editorial notes, that has not stopped various Iranian leaders from continuing to reach into the Kooky Jar.
The innocent will die in the millions just as they did in Iraq under U. S. driven sanctions. And the government will not change. What price U.S. subservience to Israeli paranoia?
Oh, EXCUSE ME, are we now being asked to BELIEVE what someone says about WMD??? I await with great interest to see what people say when *this* president says it’s an important, vital issue.
The truth apparently is that we only have two options left – military or acceptance of a nuclear Iran, neither acceptable. If we blockade, Iran will close the Straits of Hormoz and oil for the world will be stopped, and then when we attempt to open the Straits, war will truly break out and who knows what will happen after that. A nuclear Iran threatens everything in Europe and the Middle East. China truly does not care, I suspect. Russia doesn’t care much. Both need Iran as trading partner, so little likelihood of sanctions on their side of the table. Israel isn’t going to wait much longer. The only real option is to somehow blow up the nuclear enrichment plants from the inside – but that would take a lot of CIA type work from free countries around the world. And we know what the present administration thinks of our intelligence agencies. Good luck, Mr. President.
It’s all Bush’s fault.
Iran has a shortage of oil refineries. They import more than 40% of their gasoline and diesel. Their economy would grind to a halt, as would their navy and mechanized army if their refineries were disrupted. Their electrical grid would grow cold. All the centrifuges would stop. A coastal raid could eliminate thier capacity to launch Silk Worm missiles into the Straight of Hormuz. Their navy would be without fuel and they would be reduced to light infantry and whatever artillery they could pull along with farm animals. They would be kept too busy restoring basic functions and infrastructure to their conuntry to bother with sending insurgents to Iraq. All that is lacking is political will to render them virtually harmless. In my opinion, they could be left isolated and impotent in short order if the world decided it were necessary.
Well, #6, if it is that simple, then why not pull a few destroyers up along the coast and send in some cruise missles to take out all of their oil refineries? That would pretty much end all threats. Or better yet, just have Israel do it, and we’ll back them in the UN. What are we worried about then? As Patton said, “let’s do it while we’ve still go the troops over here.”
#6, would that such measures had similar effect on North Korea. As long as there is a door open somewhere things will just drag on.
Conquering a nation is no painless task for the conquerer.
Ah, but it isn’t that simple. We in the United States lack the political will to do anything about it. I do not think that there is international consensus either. For example, the Russians seem to have been in full support of Iran all along, etc.
I think that we in the US should just step back and let the rest of the world deal with Iran. Why should we get involved? Where is the threat to the United States?
The Shahab-3 missiles have a range of between 1,350 and 1,600 KM, allowing Iran to threaten virtually any nation in the middle east, Turkey, Cyprus, Romania, Bulgaria, Armenia parts of the Ukraine, parts of Russia, Pakistan, and half of India. The missiles can carry a 1,000 kg payload and the Iranians are busy developing nuclear weapon technology.
Let the countries that are threatened deal with Iran. If Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE feel threatened…let them provide their own defense.
I think that 9 is right on target. We are going to see a nuclear Iran and we will simply have the make the best of it. The threatened states will have to deal with this.
The thing is, the way the majority of those states will deal with Iran is to become more like it as they fall under its influence. Not good.