Holy Ghost

i can understand why the iranian regime is thinking this way: there are flanked by US forces in iraq and afghanistan; plus there's saudi arabia to the south west and they view israel as a US puppet regime. you could say that they feel virtually encircled by US influence, which explains why they are investing so much in fostering the insurgency in iraq.

as has been pointed out, iran has the second largest oil reserves in the middle east and they patently do not need nuclear power to service their energy needs - they have only 70 million people in a country seven times bigger than the UK. and they sure aren't concerned about kyoto and the effects of fossil fuels.

the cold war stand-off between the US and the USSR was run by essentially sane politicians on both sides who understood the natural status quo of nuclear deterrence and the concept of mutually assured destruction.

one of the few reasons israel still exists - in the teeth of arab and persian hatred - is that it survived long enough to develop its own nuclear capability that lets it keep its opponents at an uneasy arms length.

i don't believe ahmadinejad either understands - or wants to understand - MAD. i think he's more interested in a confrontation with israel and the idea of one day maybe driving an iranian atomic weapon into tel aviv in the back of a car and detonating it in an anonymous and untraceable first strike. or maybe washington. 9/11 proved once again that no country is untouchable. he'd have no shortage of volunteers.

he's also made it plain that he would allow nuclear technology transfer within the arab world. what are the guarantees that an iranian nuclear device wouldn't find its way into the hands of hamas or al qaeda in 10 or 20 years time? there are none.

this is profoundly scary stuff and why we have the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. whether the iranians like it or not, it must be enforced and they must never be allowed to proceed with this programme. if the international community cannot prevent what is a frightening game of nuclear chicken, then the israelis will inevitably go it alone and they won't ask permission first.

Brendan Hughes

But surely its aftermath proved also that any country that picks on the US gets its leader removed and its *** on a plate. Anonymous and untraceable - he's not exactly keeping his head under the parapet at the moment, is he? Ahmadinejad should realise that he'd be a very dead piece of history, and no serious leader wants that.

mart360

yea 12 years ago,

you really think your that high up and in the loop??


your an expendable item lewis

your there first line of defence,

the retired old duffer who thinks he,s got his finger on the pulse.

when in reality he,s a one man misinformation machine


Mart

2000TLondon

On the contrary, Iran were "apparently" behind most of the Palestinian terrorism, kidnappings, embassy bombings etc.....

They were ignored by the powers that be for various reasons, and now they are no longer have to defend from Saddam, and the US has many forces tied up at the moment.......

wez_sti

I'm supprised the 9/11 aftermath didnt teach all terrorists that a handfull of nutters are not going to overthrow the biggest superpowers in the world.

as terrible as 9/11 was, and the 3000 or so inoccent people that died was very sad. it has resulted in hundereds of thousands of their own people being killed, their sacred holyland being occupied by 'infedels' and the majority of their trainning camps being flattened!

learn by your mistakes, take on the US, UK whoever and they'll f*ck you up 10 times as bad!

Jamie

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay another war about to kick orfffffffff cant wait bomb the fekkers

Brendan Hughes

I haven't followed them closely, do you mean since Mr A became president? Anyway, glad you said "apparently" - if you look at the Lockerbie bombings everyone blamed Libya, despite Syria having grubby fingerprints all over the place, as Syria was being very helpful in the first Gulf War.

2000TLondon

The terrorism that went on in Beruit, the embassy bombings, the kidnappings in the 80's were "apparently" funded and aided by Iran. Seems this was known but was ignored, probably because Saddam was taking care of Iran at the time and oil needed to keep flowing......

Holy Ghost

the important thing to remember is that the ahmadinejad's government doesn't think like we do and doesn't see the world in the same way.

he reviles the west, despises israel and nurtures anti-western and anti-jewish terrorism and terrorists. his regime is the complete antithesis of mature western secular democracy. his regime believes that it - and islam - represent the only true way for iran, the region and beyond. to ahmadinejad, the islamification of europe is a very, very good thing and the first step on the road to creating a worldwide islamic caliphate.

now we have to ask ourselves why; our diplomats and politicians need to understand why and use that knowledge to talk this fundamentalist f**king loony off the roof because no sane person wants a middle eastern nuclear arms race.

Flatcapdriver

I disagree. Israel developed it's nuclear weapons in a manner which showed it to be totally untrustworthy and it was only when the Americans finally woke up to the fact that Israel finally had to wind it's neck in. Israel had the opportunity to use it's weapons during the Yom Kippur war and it didn't (before America had definite proof of their existence) so I can't see how or why the US would allow them to use them now, given that if they did they'd pretty much lose the majority of their oil supplies. Better to lose 20% via a disaffected Iran (which could be replaced) than lose the lot because Israel caused the rest of the Arab world to get medieval on the US.

I also can't see why Iran would suddenly want to take on Israel but I can equally see why they'd want a deterrent which again, is why I don't think the Iranians fail to understand MAD.

As far as I'm concerned, the genie was well and truly out of the bottle once the Israeli's got their dirty little hands on these weapons which is why the US keeps them on such a tight leash and whilst I'm not particularly keen on Iran developing them, there is always the possibility that Iran having them would produce the inevitable stale mate and at least stave off the next world war, which is what would happen if Israel did attack Iran.

Brendan Hughes

OK, that was with the loony Khomeni in charge. I was just saying that if HG expected an "anonymous and untraceable" first strike, I don't think the US would be looking too hard for a culprit, given the headlines this guy continues to make.

2000TLondon

Absolutely, although it will depend on the policy that day as to how we / they react!

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Nope, it'll depend on what Dubya wants to do. "Tone" will just follow like the tame poodle he is

Can anyone explain to me why it's OK for the Israelis to have nuclear weapons, but NOT the Iranians, Iraqis, North Koreans etc etc?

Or better still, what makes the USA and/or the Israelis think they THEY have the right to decide?

Alcazar

RedFive

And, *cough* Pakistan.

But they are our friends, right ? Right ?

RedFive

It certainly didn't start out like that. The Palestinian issue is by far and foremost a nationalistic issue. Don't forget that even back in 1972 there were christian Palestines involved in the Munich massacre. And that they were hit very hard by Jordan. No one wanted anything to do with them.

I'm sure there will be some funding to Hamas or Hezbollah, but I think there's a lot of spin about Iran too. They haven't invaded another country in about, erm, 2.000 years or so.

I agree that the current regime is a bit on the whacko side - although, don't forget, much of the tough talk is for internal consumption.

The situation is so complicated, it's almost impossible to just write a few one-liners about all this. For example: the Iraqy shiites have very little regard for their Iranian brethren - although again there may be funding etc...

Sure, they have enough oil for about 80 years. But they also sell the ****, right ? So what's better than keeping on selling the black stuff, annoying the US by threathening to convert their oil-market into Euro's, and use nuclear energy for their current needs ?

kammy

Thank you my good friend.

2000TLondon

They already have the weapons.......

Flatcapdriver

The development of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal was a direct response to India's development of the 'Smiling Buddha' which is what Iran are trying to do in my opinion. At least Iran has signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty unlike Israel.

pslewis

Those with the weapons don't want those without them getting hold of them ........... and I agree totally!

Israel will go in and do the job, quietly and with precision - like the British would.

The US would wipe out everything that moved and then realised they were actually attacking Saudi !!!

Pete

DocJock

And who has breached the NNPT more than everybody else put together ?

3 letters, starts with U and ends in A.

ps RedFive, tsk, shame, Mohammed Shah, "The Second Alexander" and "Shadow of Allah upon the Earth", invaded everywhere within marching distance between 1210 and 1218 until the Mongols kicked his royal ***.

Flatcapdriver

But does it? The US/UK would has neither the stomach nor the ability to invade Iran at present, particularly under the pretext of Iran having nuclear weapons - they tried that one last time and it would have no credibility now.

Israel? No way, it would be politically unacceptable to the rest of the Arab world and would only exacerbate an awkward situation and most likely unite the Arab world against the West.

Sanctions? Nope. The West cannot afford the increase in the cost of oil for starters that would exist as a result of losing Iranian oil and whilst it could be replaced by appeasement with Venezuela by the US, it would come at too high a price.

Personally, I think Ahmadinejad is playing a blinder at totally the right time. For Iran, that is.

RedFive

There's always one isn't there

Holy Ghost

**

the point i'm making is that the israelis possess a nuclear capability for deterrence purposes to ensure that neither arab nor persian tries it on. and that strategy has so far paid off.

FCD, you may have misunderstood what i meant by the israelis going it alone: i meant destroying iran's embryonic nuclear energy programme much as it did with the raid on iraq's two power reactors at osirak in 1981 - not a pre-emptive nuclear strike against iran. not even the israelis are that mental.

the fact remains that ahmadinejad stated late last year that israel should be 'wiped off the map' and that confirms his status as a fully paid-up, card-carrying fundamentalist anti-semite. he may just have been playing to a domestic gallery with his outlandish **** comments. or he may actually mean it as his political ambition.

anyway, this situation is not so much about israel as about the implications of a long-term nuclear capability becoming available to people who - to relatively reasonable democratic secular minds in the EU, US and UN - are off their collective rockers.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Nail. Head. Hit.

NS04

PS Durka, Durka

Flatcapdriver

For some reason I can't copy and paste properly so I can't split your points up but anyway...

Yes, I understand Israel's reliance on it's nuclear weapons as a deterrent which only happened as a result of the US's negligence and if they had their time again, there's no way the US would allow Israel to develop them and the best thing that Israel could do in my opinion is to follow South Africa's lead.

The political climate of 1981 is very different today and I don't believe that the Arab world would sit back and let anything like what happened then re-occurr without a massive backlash against the US, both politically and economically and I don't believe that the US is prepared to test that out by allowing Israel to do anything about Iran's nuclear programme.

I don't really want either Israel or Iran to have nuclear weapons because there are way too many hotheads on both sides but because the West has allowed Israel to go down this route either blindly (the US) or because they were conned (France) means that things are coming home to roost. Iran wants a nuclear capability for the same reasons Pakistan did and that is the fault of the Israelis - nobody else. That is why I believe that an attack by Israel won't happen because the US won't allow it for the aforementioned reasons.

The problem with this debate is that we fundamentally disagree over Israel and it's place in the middle east (I think) with you seeing it more as a white knight with peaceful intent and me seeing them as an uneccessary destabilising force in the middle east and not much better than some of the arab extremists. Fortunately, the US keeps this puppet state under reasonable control but the only way to sort this whole situation is not by upping the ante with newer and better weapons, nor by wholesale invasion but quite simply by economic means that both parties gain from.

Luan Pra bang

USA messed around with Irans politics before and thats what led to the fundamentalism after the USA puppet leader was overthrown. Most Iranians are sensible people who would really not have Mullahs tell them what to do but all the attempted interfearance from the USA just encourages anti western fundamentalism. Every USA effort to control other countries IE Nicaragua Cuba Laos Iran Iraq Israel vietnam cambodia etc has ended in a total fcukup why will this be any different. No country in the world has caused the problems the USA has and yet we trust them to decide what Iran can and can't do ?

Vegescoob

Iran, oil and lots of gas.
Now what are we generating much of our electricity from?
LNG terminals waiting.
Shame the Iranians have large contracts with China and India.

Ted Maul

57 posts and still a rational articulate debate...where's Moses when you need him..

pslewis

The most dangerous strategic nuclear arms race in the world today is the one between Israel and Iran -- far more complex than almost anyone realizes and vastly more dangerous.

Ironically, the number of weapons involved on both sides are miniscule, not only by the standards of the U.S-Soviet/Russian Cold War nuclear balance, but also even compared with the much more limited strategic nuclear stand-offs centering around North Korea or India and Pakistan today.

But that does not really matter: Far more important is the fact that the margin for error or miscalculation on either side is vastly smaller than in any other potential nuclear conflict in the world. And the danger that either party may react catastrophically to the fear that the other will attempt a devastating preemptive first strike is consequently far greater.

Israel today has a far greater proportion of its population protected by state-of-the-art ballistic missile defense systems than any other country in the world. But since Israel is so small and since such a disproportionately large part of its population is vulnerably concentrated in a single thermonuclear kill zone in and around Tel Aviv, that speaks less to the Jewish State's undoubted military and technological strengths than to its geographic and demographic vulnerabilities.

As Dore Gold, former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations and an influential adviser to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon told UPI recently, 70 percent of Israel's total population and 80 percent of its infrastructure is concentrated in the Tel Aviv region. No other modern industrial nation has its population and key infrastructure so densely packed into such a small area, he noted.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has publicly threatened to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. He has questioned the historic veracity of the Holocaust, the genocidal mass killing of six million European Jews by the ***** through World War II. And at the same time, he has embarked on the systematic purging of the Iranian government and armed forces of more moderate officials.

The combination of Israel's physical vulnerability with Iran's political extremism has, therefore, produced a balance of terror that is now on a hair- trigger alert.

Israel MUST attack ....... and soon!!

Pete

unclebuck

Cutting and pasting again peter?

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.ph...9-034151-3932r

Someone else copied other work and passed it off as their own didn't they? Who was it now....

lol