SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: steve harris who wrote (222263)3/3/2007 4:24:43 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Why would you stop it? It's unlikely it would actually use nuclear weapons should it become a member of the club. If it did use them you can nuke them in to the stone age, and it is unlikely the weapons would be used against the US. So why on Earth would we start a war to stop this? I just don't see the benefit. Israel may be worried, but that's really not a US problem, or shouldn't be.



To: steve harris who wrote (222263)3/3/2007 5:06:53 PM
From: Katelew  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
I can't give you an answer. I don't know what the facts are regarding Iran.

At this point it's still speculation that Iran is even aiming for a weapons program.

My biggest problem is I don't trust the Bush admin. to tell the truth regarding Iran, to pursue diplomacy, or to develop the kind of economic ties between nations that defuse tensions.

Personally, I'd prefer there be no additional countries in the world with nuclear weapons. But, before forming opinions as to Iran in particular, I'd like to see a different administration deal with the problem. And, like Inktomi, I see it as a potential threat to Israel, not to us.

At this point in time, I have a feeling that continued sanctions, weak as they are, plus the growing unpopularity of MA with his own people could result in transparency by Iran regarding its nuclear program if a diff. US admin. were in office.