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

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (247014)	10/30/2007 5:12:51 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Even if you are right, we do not have the ability to take this out and if we try and delay it, we risk a wider war and make our forces in the persian gulf and iraq far more vulnerable, not to mention risk for our allies in the region, all of them. You shouldnt concentrate on the front end so much nadine. The back end offers greater security. There were no nukes with hitler and we couldnt turn germany into a parking lot in minutes. With iran we can and we must make that threat credible if they use nukes first. Thats the big difference and it worked well against stalin and successors as well as Mao. Now as far as preventing them from getting it--we need to make it worth their while as we 'seemingly' did for NK. I'm sorry Nadine, although the mullahs are bad guys they do run a country and we shouldnt fixate on early days of the regime when they were in fact nuts, albeit nuts for a reason because ours and israels support for the shah.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (247014)	10/30/2007 5:31:08 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

"Today Ahmedinijad is saying some nutso stuff about restoring Iran's greatness in the world," Can you point to a leader in the world who has no desire or rhetoric about seeing his constituencies rise to greatness? "Once again, the sophisticates of London and New York dismiss it as rhetoric. But what if it isn't? We have the ability to monitor developments, military buildups, political alliances and strategems, diplomatic coercions, economic developments, etc. These are the things we can and should watch in a measured and predictive manner and react to in a responsible and accountable fashion. " Can we afford not to consider the possibility?" No. Neither can we afford to react to unmanifest and fear based what ifs? For the moment, time is on our side and we have wonderful tools of communication and diplomacy that were not available in the 1930s. We also have a tremendous resource called human decency, founded upon the ideas of 'Peace on Earth' and 'Goodwill toward all' that isn't new, is unlimited in potential, and oft passed over in consideration of the more sexy and convenient 'nuke em all' fear based options.