Posted on 04/25/2006 9:39:33 PM PDT by edpc
American and Iranian leaders are talking a great deal about each other -- when they should be devoting far more attention to talking to each other. Both sides are throwing sharp verbal punches with increasing frequency, amid news reports of a possible U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear facilities and continued efforts by Iran's leaders to advance their nation's nuclear capability.
While preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power is a bipartisan goal shared by just about everyone, the risks and perils of a war with Iran are little discussed in public by government leaders and are barely mentioned by the media. Americans continue to uselessly dissect the motives for invading Iraq -- when it is too late to do anything about it -- while failing to debate the far more fateful consequences of conflict with Iran when it might still be prevented.
There's no question that if Iran developed nuclear weapons the move would further unsettle the Middle East, put U.S. friends and allies at higher risk, raise fears of diversion of nuclear weapons to terrorist groups, frighten Israel, and undercut American authority in the Persian Gulf.
At the same time, a U.S. attack on Iran would likely cause a spike in the price of oil, alienate Muslims, create a split within the NATO alliance, and lead to an increase in terrorism. It might even draw Iranian forces over the Iraqi border to attack U.S. troops.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The time period of his ambassadorship shows the origins of this pap. How in the hell can this guy believe we can have any reasonable dialogue with this current crowd in Iran? Does he bother to read the papers to which he submits his articles?
You took the "words" right outta my mouth.
...all we've been doing is talking to Iran. Meanwhile, they're busy building bombs...
"It might even draw Iranian forces over the Iraqi border to attack U.S. troops."
I would like to see a mass charge of Iranian "troops" al la the Iran/Iraq war and meet up with the non-lethal "heat ray" now deployed with our forces.
The little Golden Keys (purchased from Tiawan) given to the chargers who were willing to give up their lives for it's promise - might just change their minds.
Call it instant re-programming! This would be a good thing.
Bring it on!!!
Talking to the Mullahs is far more dangerous than going to war with the Mullahs.
Millions dead (talk) vs. thousands dead (air strikes).
The US pretty much did nothing--militarily that is-- until 1941.
"The US pretty much did nothing--militarily that is-- until 1941"
And that is your outlook?
Dig deep down into history. You'll be surprised.
Nope not my outlook, just saying that had Japan not attacked US, Europe would look a lot different. I approve of Bush's pre-emptive doctrine, I'm just saying not to look at history through rose-colored lenses.
Well I agree with ya there. But.
"The US pretty much did nothing--militarily that is-- until 1941"
That is wrong.
Don't make me prove you wrong.
Bomb first, talk later.
Precisely. Does anyone think that the Iranians don't understand the US position on their nuclear enrichment program? So what would be point to talking to them? To offer to enrich uranium for them? The Russians have already done that. To sign a "non-aggression" treaty with them, so that they'll have an incentive not to produce nukes? When did we ever seriously threaten them (prior to their attempts to produce nukes)?
There's only one subject the Iranians want to talk about, and that's how they can keep their "peaceful" nuke program going (like El Baradei suggested, so that the mullahs don't lose face), with a very loose inspection regime that they could cheat on if they were so disposed (which of course they're not, take their word for it). Naturally, they'll be delighted to offer President Bush a Clintonesque photo op, where he can shake hands with Ahmadinejad, and sign a "treaty" that "guarantees" nuclear peace in our time.
From ozoneliar | 04/25/2006 10:19:41 PM PDT replied
If you could enlighten me , that would be appreciated.
*
*
Re: Time To Talk With Iran
To ozoneliar | 04/25/2006 10:34:46 PM PDT sent
"The US pretty much did nothing--militarily that is-- until 1941"
Yeah. Forget the Wars before.
Revolution
War of 1812
Mexican-American War
Civil war
Spanish-American War
WW1
WW11
***
***
Re: Time To Talk With Iran
From ozoneliar | 04/25/2006 10:38:19 PM PDT read
I was referring to the fact that the US invoment in WWII was limited to sanctions before Pearl Harbor.
***
***
"The US pretty much did nothing--militarily that is-- until 1941"
D'oh
***
Don't bring a knife to an armored division fight...
And what would the nuking of an American city or cities likely cause?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.