[SevenMinusOne]

This WOT will be fought at the time and places of our choosing...

[gondramB]

>>So, if the U.S. is serious about a regime change in Iran, if the U.S. is hoping for a democratic form of government in Iran and if the U.S. truly advocates a broader democracy in the Middle East,<<

Well, our number one priority is that Iran not start firing off Nukes. #2 is stopping Iranian sponsored terrorism. Everything else comes lower.

[dighton]

What we have seen is too much carrot, but not enough stick . . .

IMHO, you will see some rather spectacular stick before too long.

[Thane_Banquo]

I would like to take this moment to point out that this is all Jimmy Carter's fault for not standing up to the Ayatollahs in the first place.

[Teacher317]

The United States still holds billions of dollars of the Iranian assets in U.S. banks. It only makes sense to utilize this fund for the regime change by the Iranian opposition abroad. This money must be returned to its legitimate heirs, the Iranian people.

So that it can be commandeered by the radical government, to further their causes. Yeah, THAT'S the solution! /s>

I appreciates the authors facts. Too bad his willful ignorance of the realities of tyrannical government keeps this article from being a keeper.

[Jim Noble]

Is the United States serious about Iran?

No, not really.

[trubluolyguy]

Is Iran serious about having nukes?

[LibFreeUSA]

-"...how serious is President Bush about the Iranian plight?"

As serious as he is about the Cuban's plight.

[nuconvert]

I like your idea of unfreezing assets to support opposition groups.