Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (9117)	1/16/2006 4:58:39 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541629

Maybe... I just hate to think of that option at the top_o_the_list for consideration.

To: Lane3 who wrote (9117)	1/16/2006 7:23:19 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541629

Looking at it from Iran's point of view for a moment, can you see why they might be desperate? Russia to the north. Pakistan to the East. Occupied Iraq to the west (and Israel beyond). And several US fleets to the south. All with nuclear arms, and none especially friendly. If they weren't trying to get nuclear arms, their leader would be even more certifiable than he plainly already is... I'm basically hoping the lunatics there and in Israel can be kept in check. Frankly, nukes in Netanyahu's hands scare me almost more... bear in mind, Iran hasn't even gone outside treaties yet - it's Israel which has undeclared nukes in violation of the NPT, not Iran. And neither they nor Pakistan has a 'no first use' policy even as an aspiration. <edit> and to those yelping "what would you do" like demented warhawk parrots... well, how about offering an alliance to Iran, guaranteeing to protect its sovereignty and leave it inviolable within its borders, and massively punish any nation or body assaulting it - in exchange for its nuclear program being handed over to IAEA control? Remove the source of its fear and maybe it wouldn't feel the need for such weapons. Worth a try, especially if this is offered as an inducement for the pragmatists. And surely preferable to stomping anyone we don't like simply because we're the biggest kids on the block right now, both morally and with regard to the future.

To: Lane3 who wrote (9117)	1/17/2006 10:50:33 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541629

If it sets their nuclear program back twenty years, it's worth the risk, IMO. That would be very high risk. I have read they have learned their lesson and dispersed their capabilities and are deep underground. My understanding is that the majority of the Iranian population (not Arab to begin with) is highly educated and are culturally much closer to the west. You don't want to lose them. I suggest a much zanier solution. Buy Russian and Chinese support to denuclearize Iran. Let Russia into NATO. Give verbal (but not physical) support to China over Taiwan. Nixon agreed to it anyway.