Israel won't accept less than total halt of Iran's nuclear enrichment

[Yzd Khalifa]

Oh I think even Romney would have seen the sense in not engaging in open hostilities with Iran. Bombing them is not going to stop them. That's why I termed any such action as war that will in its best outcome for America lead to a Pyrrhic victory.

So then we should look forward to a nuclear ME?

Romney had a good stomch to go to war with Iran, and Yes, the US military capabilities are ultra lethal and can take the whole infrastructure in a matter of days. But the issue is that a war costs an arm and leg which the US lacks for now.

Well, KSA is caught up in a situation like this, a fanatic mullah regime VS a Likud psychopath, and we can't stand for that.

Yes, I think that we have to accept that the Iranian regime believes that it must have nuclear weapons to protect itself, i.e. its theocratic revolution, from us (the USA). Now, of course if they finally have them, then the Sunni powers will have to match them. So, the unintended consequence of Iran getting nuclear weapons may be that a Shite-Sunni nuclear conflict occurs.

I think we should accept Iranian nuclear weapons and trust that the internal contradictions of their theocratic state will eventually lead to "regime" change within the next two generations.

No, Israel must be the first target for them. The 12th imam won't appear till they capture Jerusalem, which might require signing a pact with " the Sunni " devil at least till Israel is erased. Therefore, I suspect that a Sunni vs Shia nuclear holocaust, at least till Israel is gone. Suffice to say that Iran helped Al-Qaidea in Iraq to go and kill some Americans.

The Iranian Gov't is a rational actor though, but they still have nasty hardliners.

 

[Solomon2]

There is no course of action in this matter that guarantees that "a whole lot of death" will NOT happen. Either way could result in nuclear terrorism (in New York or Washington) or a nuclear exchange (in the ME). My opinion is that relying on mutual assured destruction is the least bad option.

With Iran employing "stateless actors" as their nuclear proxies? No country would be able to maintain an alliance in the face of such anonymous divide-and-rule tactics, just as Israel has little diplomatic support from Western countries today. From there the Iranians can just pick off national capitals as they wish.

Well, KSA is caught up in a situation like this, a fanatic mullah regime VS a Likud psychopath, and we can't stand for that.

Iran is run by fanatic mullahs but Israel's leaders are not psychopaths. You've known for a long time now that Israel and its Jews are morally superior to anything the Arabs have been for generations or currently aspire to become in the future. Why don't you just change your mind and earn some of the many blessings Israel has?

 

[TruthSeeker]

This is one of those problems for which there is no painless "experiment" to run to see which "theory" is correct. Mutual assured destruction (MAD) assumes rational actors. Perhaps the Iranian regime comes the closest to being "irrational". I'll concede that. Still, MAD has worked since 1945 among states that did not seem totally rational to each other. My OPINION is that MAD, aggressively and loudly proclaimed, 24/7, is the "least bad" policy to deal with Iran.

PS -- Good night!

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

Iran is run by fanatic mullahs but Israel's leaders are not psychopaths. You've known for a long time now that Israel and its Jews are morally superior to anything the Arabs have been for generations or currently aspire to become in the future. Why don't you just change your mind and earn some of the many blessings Israel has?

It is fault to assume that one is David and the other is Goliath. Don't expect me to take sides because my people have been bleeding over the years because of an ideology similar to the mullahs, while the other had comitted crimes again a whole broad base of human being.

I never said that the Israeli leaders are psychopaths, but BiBi is. I lived among Jews to see how humane they really are. You know nothing about the Arabs, but you must have a knee jerk reaction.

Anywho, Iran vowed to erase Israel off the map so the 12th Imam will come. For us, we don't have a dog in this fight, at least for now.

 

[Solomon2]

Still, MAD has worked since 1945 among states that did not seem totally rational to each other.

No, sir. At least after Stalin's death, Soviet Russia behaved as a rational actor: not peaceful, more like a thief breaking and entering when doors were unlocked and houses unguarded - and the thief's home address was known. So good security was enough to deter war. These things don't apply here: the mullahs look forward to mass murder - even to the point of creating millions of "involuntary martyrs" - in their quest for supremacy. They will be satisfied with nothing less than re-establishing the Persian Empire of old and the destruction of "The Great Satan."

 

[Secur]

We most certainly can live with a nuclear armed Iran FOR NOW. But, KSA will introduce one as soon as Iran goes nuclear.

To be very honest , a nuclear KSA and Iran doesn't hurt our interest in any way .

Good for maintaining the balance of power . Detente !

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

To be very honest , a nuclear KSA and Iran doesn't hurt our interest in any way .

Good for maintaining the balance of power . Detente !

Iran has two intension to go nuclear:- 1- blocking any regime change attempts 2- a fulfillment for the 12th Imam prophecy.

Nah, Pakistan is out of the picture.

 

[Solomon2]

I never said that the Israeli leaders are psychopaths, but BiBi is. I lived among jewries -

"Jewries"?

You know nothing about the Arabs, but you must have a knee jerk reaction.

I've lived and worked with Arabs. Most were murder-minded jerks (especially when drunk) but the Moroccan was nice - but he admitted his first girlfriend was a Jew, he knew Jews at home first-hand, so he discounted all the anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist crap his culture produced. (He was also one of the finest men I ever knew, though he would have scoffed if I ever said so to him.) (Moroccans, with 200 year-old relations with the U.S. and fond memories of their WWII liberation, didn't have much anti-Americanism in them.)

For us, we don't have a dog in this fight, at least for now.

In short, you're perfectly willing to have the Jews die for you first. The sort of divide-and-subvert tactics the Iranians love. I suppose you think that suppressing the Gulf Shi'as will be enough to save you. But once Iran has The Bomb the Iranians will soon succeed at creating their own Sunni proxies; as crafty Osama bin Laden taught, Muslims are nothing if not wind-tasters, always siding with "the strong horse". You'll have a mullah-inspired civil war - maybe several - and the end result will be like Syria or Lebanon today.

 

[Secur]

Naturally, Netanyahu isn't about to let that happen. His responsibility is to ensure Israel's survival, not to sacrifice his country to let Westerners sleep in safety and comfort for two or three extra years. It is only acceptable, then, that Iran never attain the capability to produce nuclear weapons at all.

If only he can find , a way to stop it . Doesn't seem likely in Iran's case .

Israel's survival is ensured in the current ' status quo ' , not in attacking Tehran , further destabilizing the region and in the meantime , endanger its own survival with ' unintended consequences ' too . I would be surprised to hear that Iran doesn't have the capability to produce nuclear weapons . After all , Tel Aviv never publicly acknowledged that it had nuclear weapons , right ?

 

[KingMamba]

Before they wanted guarantees that they would not enrich further than 20% now they want complete stop to enrichment.

 

[Secur]

Iran has two intension to go nuclear:- 1- blocking any regime change attempts 2- a fulfillment for the 12th Imam prophecy.

Nah, Pakistan is out of the picture.

Well for one , Iran lives in a very hostile neighborhood due to the ancient Arab-Persian rivalry . Why have you not counted that as a reason first of all ?

I , personally , will be happy to believe that .

 

[KingMamba]

"Jewries"?

I've lived and worked with Arabs. Most were murder-minded jerks (especially when drunk) but the Moroccan was nice - but he admitted his first girlfriend was a Jew, he knew Jews at home first-hand, so he discounted all the anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist crap his culture produced. (Moroccans, with 200 year-old relations with the U.S. and fond memories of their WWII liberation, didn't have much anti-Americanism in them.)

In short, you're perfectly willing to have the Jews die for you first. The sort of divide-and-subvert tactics the Iranians love. I suppose you think that suppressing the Gulf Shi'as will be enough to save you. But once Iran has The Bomb the Iranians will soon succeed at creating their own Sunni proxies; as crafty Osama bin Laden taught, Muslims are nothing if not wind-tasters, always siding with "the strong horse". You'll have a mullah-inspired civil war - maybe several - and the end result will be like Syria or Lebanon today.

Full of bs with your knowing arabs stories. So we are to believe the blood thirsty arabs let your zionist blowing hasbara in the face live?
@Yzd Khalifa do not bother with this clown.

 

[Secur]

I've lived and worked with Arabs. Most were murder-minded jerks (especially when drunk) but the Moroccan was nice - but he admitted his first girlfriend was a Jew

 

[Solomon2]

If only he can find , a way to stop it . Doesn't seem likely in Iran's case .

There's always "Plan B": improvisation, something which Israel excels in and the world marvels at.

Israel's survival is ensured in the current ' status quo ' , not in attacking Tehran , further destabilizing the region and in the meantime , endanger its own survival with ' unintended consequences '...

No logic there.

 

[KingMamba]

I totally missed the part where they were also drunkards.