.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Rantings of a Sandmonkey

Be forewarned: The writer of this blog is an extremely cynical, snarky, pro-US, secular, libertarian, disgruntled sandmonkey. If this is your cup of tea, please enjoy your stay here. If not, please sod off

Sunday, January 22, 2006

Fred Kaplan needs your help

The Iranian nuclear crisis (you know they will call it that soon enough) is confusing the hell out of Fred Kaplan, to the degree that he is asking his readers to give him a peacefull way out, because he can't seem to find one himself. I don't know if there is one actually. War- or at least military action- against Iran over its nukes seems kind of inevtiable at this point to me, but I could be wrong. What do you think?


At 1/22/2006 05:25:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not sure


At 1/22/2006 05:27:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Unfortunately I believe you are right, This isn't going to be nice, pretty or over soon. I hope you are in America very soon.

At 1/22/2006 09:48:00 PM, Blogger programmer craig said...

It's war to regime change, SM. It's looked like that to me from when the Iranians first started playing games with the Europeans in these so-called nogotiations. Iran want nukes more than it wants anything that anyone could offer them. Iran seems to think that the world is just going to give in at the last minute and let them make the nukes.

But all the games must be played, and all the last chances given. I personally hope that a strong enough rebellion can be started in Iran to topple the government, because that's the best possible solution, for everyone.

At 1/23/2006 07:09:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Iran's prepared. Their nuclear facilities are in very deep bunkers. Reportedly, they have back-up or duplicate sites. The eventual failure of diplomacy is probably according to plan for the Iranians.

I don't know if they were expecting the Europeans to throw in the towel already. lol

At 1/23/2006 10:47:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read that the majority of the Iranian population is young and doesn't care for the corrupt theocracy. It is still possible that they might overthrow the reigime. Certainely there would be a lot of chaos, and opertunities for items to disappear, but it would cause less bloodshed in the long term, and I am just talking Iranians here. I do not Iran is going to be capable of causeing sufficient damage to the United States to be a credable threat the way the old USSR was. I don't think the Russians or the Chinese are willing to risk their own nations to protect another people. Long term, a lot of people in the mid-east may end up wishing they'd risked more to put the Guardian Council out of business. Long-term thinking tends to be neglected for short-term thinking, perhaps because of the uncertainties and more urgent priorities.

At 1/23/2006 12:11:00 PM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Iranians have been discontent for over 10 years, anon 10:47... I'd like to see a successful internal revolt too, but I'm not willing to bet my life on it.

"I do not Iran is going to be capable of causeing sufficient damage to the United States to be a credable threat the way the old USSR was."

Oh, so the fact that Iran with nukes could only do such limited things as blowing up several of our largest cities, we shouldn't be overly alarmed? Where do you live, if I may ask?

At 1/23/2006 12:57:00 PM, Anonymous Kathy K said...

Umm - I'd say the middle east (and surrounding areas, like Europe and Africa) are at more risk than the US.

The Iranian government is most likely to (at least try to) nuke Israel, and if the Israelis respond in kind (which they will if they have been nuked and may if they are threatened believably enough), Iran, and possibly other areas of the middle east, will be a radioactive glass lake.

The radiation will be far more intense in the area than it will be by the time it gets to us.

I don't think there'd be enough left of Iran to attack us. And I'd be mourning quite a number of people I rather like - so I'd really prefer that Iran didn't get nukes.

At 1/23/2006 06:34:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kathy K, I think the same, unfortunately. I hope that the Iranians understand what their government is willing to do and stops it in it's tracks. Anyone who wants to know anything at all about radioactivity should read just a few of the documents online about Chernobyl. Then remember that that was just a meltdown and not an attack.

At 1/24/2006 07:09:00 AM, Anonymous Jokerman said...

The best option with Iran is to bomb their Nuclear facilities, even if they are deep down in the ground or duplicated, once & twice & thrice if needed. Iranian leaders wont be able to keep building such sites so fast & with ease as they did before as the doors will eventually close & they will have to think of another way to bolster their power but hopefully the Iranians will realise these Mullahs aren´t taking them anywhere but backwards fast & get rid of them for good.
Im afraid Iran might invade some neighbouring country to bargain with as a last resort.
& we will have to see what iran does regarding the OIl it threatens the west with.
But that new iranian leader, ahmenejad is a total jerk & i cant seem him ruling for long there.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home