3avv709cq9j9kdxqe aqfxrl8onso6 [URL=http://www.371862.com/492474.html] t9edh4df [/URL] gxtblxm4sowx

Really, my Iranian slant that mirrors the analysis of IAEA, the NIE issued by 16 intel agencies, and the public statements of the President and Foreign minister of Russia. It seems like the neoconservatives and the Israeli boy that cried wolf are the ones isolated. And I take note of the fact that you can barely contain your disdain for my racial stock. AGAIN THE NIE WASN'T ISSUED BY THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT BUT THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT, VLADIMIR PUTIN IS A NOTED ISLAMIST FIGHTER, THE IAEA A UN SPONSORED INTERNATIONAL BODY.

AND ALL THE FACTS I POINT OUT ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT'S INVOLVEMENT IN DESTROYING THE FIRST ORGANIC DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN THE MIDDLE EAST IN 1953, IS NOT MY POSITION. In fact, the CIA admits to it and considers it one of their great successes. It is well documented in mainstream history books in the west and east, and the CIA brags about it. Talk about nerve when Condolezza rice accuses the Iranian government of meddling the middle east. Hey Condi you fool they have only lived their for 50 centuries.

I am satisfied to accept what the US and Israel has said, and not your tirade. I don't know (or maybe I do) why you are trying to hand me your Iranian slant. Good luck...
We will see what will happen - OK?...

It is not about my personal wants or desires or my personal devotions. This is about facts and issues. Bush is contradicted by his own government's intelligence services. This is a fact, additionally Israel has been making the same EXACT PREDICTION FOR CLOSE TO TWENTY YEARS HOW COME THE EXPERTISE OF THEIR INTELLIGENCE ASSESMENT ON IRAN DOESN'T GET QUESTIONED AS POLITICAL BUT THE NIE IS BEING SPUN AS A POLITICAL COUP. Excuse me if I choose to accept the word of El Baradei, a noble prize winning nuclear physicist over the crazed rantings of Mushroom cloud Condi and Ehud Olmert. Let me see I can believe the IAEA that was correct in both Iran and iraq, and is populated by award winning PHD physicists or I can accept the word of radical rightwing zionists and a woman who claimed that we had 225,000 "good Iraqi troops" fighting by our side in 2005. THE WORLD IS NOT QUESTIONING THE VERACITY OF THE IRANIAN POSITION AS MUCH AS IT IS QUESTIONING THE VERACITY OF THE CURRENT NEOCONSERVATIVE AND MILITARIST MINDSET THAT DOMINATES OUR GOVERNMENT. Snide remarks directed at my intentions don't change facts. 90% of the globe doesn't trust these people, and for very good reason.

Thee is no trust between the US and Iran.. What you are saying isn't going to inspire it to happen - either. It is the situation at hand. For you to continue on with your arguement is up to you.

You haven't proven a thing - except that your reasoning is no different than Iran's - and it is at a point of stalemate. If the Iranian leadrship continues to hold the same ground as you are now - nothing is moving forward. Is that what you want?

All amateur psychology and neocon mind reading aside, the idea that Iran, a weak state that until half a lifetime ago was a defacto colony first of the british and then the Americans is somehow threatening its former superpower masters is ludicrous. And no diatribes from the Podorhetz and krauthammers of the world can change the facts.

The facts are that a chant never killed anyone but American weapons and money in the middle east along with active military involvement does. Back to the issue of the fictional NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM AND BUSH'S FICTIONAL WORLD WAR III ANALOGY, THE BEST INFO OUR GOVERNMENT HAS CONTRADICTS ALL THE FAIRY TALES BUSH HAS BEEN SPINNING FOR MONTHS. And this NIE report is in fact not the most absolving off assesments. Russia's position is not only that Iran doesn't currently have a weapons program, but that Iran never had a significant weapons program ever, not prior to 2003 either. SO YOU SEE OUR ASSESMENTS ARE NOT OUT OF WHACK WITH WHAT THE RUSSIANS OR THE IAEA HAVE CONCLUDED. I deal in facts, I don't do pop psychology and Neocon fairy tale making. I know Iran is planning to blast a death ray given to them by Klingons into the Sun, and our only option is to nuke them now. Neocons go sell your fairy tales to school children and republican primary voters they are the only ones paranoid and immature enough to believe you.

You see - Farzad - that is why I said that the West in general - doesn't believe Iranian intentions are benevolent. We didn't have marches that chanted' Death to Iran' here - but Iran chanted 'Death to America'!

It would be great if the US and Iran cools off for another fifty years and then - MAYBE we can talk.

You blamed US chemical plants for what Saddam had done? Doesn't that occur to you that you are misplacing your anger? You have some issues to deal with, but you propose nothing to solve them...

Iran doesn't owe you or the American gov't any apology, America overthrew Iran's democratic government in 1953 and destroyed the greatest domestic leader Iran has produced in a century and half Mohammed Mossadegh. Not to mention that we sold Saddam chemical components that where used to gas thousands of Iranians. I have been to Iran their are blind people everywhere from sales that Honeywell and Dow Chemichal made to Saddam. Buddy nobody owes you or the American government anything, and certainly not an apology. Maybe America and Israel are hated in the Muslim world as a result of their actions and policies, and not as a result of irrational Islamic bloodlust. The bottom line is this the IAEA, HAS YET TO FIND EVIDENCE OF A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM AFTER YEARS OF INSPECTION. AND THE FACT THAT THE CIA AND OTHER INTEL AGENCIES SAY THE SAME THING AFTER YEARS OF INSPECTION LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THEM, AND DISBELIEVE WHATEVER ISRAEL HAS TO SAY ON THE ISSUE.

If Israel is such an expert how come they have been wrong on their time-line for Iranian nukes for owe 15-20 years they have saying Iran is 2 years or 5 years away from a nuke. Iran poses no threat to America, Iran isn't building bases in every single county that surrounds America. I WILL MAKE A BET WITH ANYONE ON THIS WEBSITE, 10,000 DOLLARS, THE NEXT COUNTRY THAT LAUNCHES A WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST WILL EITHER BE ISRAEL OR AMERICA, AND CERTAINLY NOT IRAN. IRAN HASN'T INVADED ANYBODY IN 150 YEARS, ISRAEL AND AMERICA ATTACK A COUNTRY MORE OFTEN THAN PEOPLE CHANGE SOCKS. THE MORAL SUPERIORITY THAT YOU NEOCONS PERCEIVE EXISTS ONLY IN YOUR DELUDED MINDS.

b3ip3ifb4f463 lid5klapwn6icc20 [URL=http://www.125773.com/341816.html] 1c47mnl1c [/URL] kovb3ne72gnhdnw

Well, you know Farzad - that there hasn't been a lot of trust twards Iran since they had all of those televised marches of 'death to America' and 'kill Americans' and so on - back in 1979. I do not think they have done anything at all that shows trust or a willingness to change their minds or attitudes twards the West. That is pretty much a 'mute point'.

If Israel produces all kinds of info on Iran - I would be most interested in hearing what they have to say. If you want to believe Bush or nor believe - that is up to you. But I certainly cannot trust the Iranians ever since diplomatic ties were cut off. I mean; doesn't that make any difference to your line of reasoning - or the way you percieve the situation?
Whatever - dude...

BS...
If your would have bothered to read the IAEA report, you would find out the they far from being satisfied.
Read it...I did - twice.

I have been saying that Bush has been lying on Iran for three years. Why? because the IAEA, who by the way was right on Iraq's nuclear program, has been saying the same thing for three years. And during a significant portion of this time, Iran was operating under voluntary ADDITIONAL PROTOCOLS, THE MOST INTRUSTIVE TYPE OF INSPECTIONS, AND THEY FROZE ENRICHMENT DURING THE PRESIDENCY OF KHATAMI, ALL VOLUNTARILY. These actions and cooperation did nothing to change Israel's bogus predictions. The IAEA was right about Iraq, Israel and America where wrong.

This is why I never believed Bush on Iran's weapons program. QUITE FRANKLY, I AM SURE ISRAEL WILL PRODUCE ALL KINDS OF EVIDENCE THAT WILL FURTHER SERVE THEIR INTERESTS. LIKE I SAID YOU CAN CHECK THE ARCHIVES OF THE JERUSALEM POST, ISRAELI EXPERTS HAVE BEEN PREDICATING A FIVE YEAR TIMELINE FOR THE IRANIAN BOMB SINCE THE LATE EIGHTIES AND EARLY NINETIES. The proof is in the pudding. The IAEA, American intel, and the Russians have all gone on record to contradict Israel's bogus self-serving predictions.

IT IS TIME TO TELL THE BOY WHO CRIED WOLF THAT THEY AREN'T GOING TO GET THE WAR THAT SEEM TO WANT SO BADLY. This is all about maintaining the post-coloniolist domination of America and Israel in the middle east and nothing to do with imagined threats against America. Iran isn't occupying mexico and making noise about regime change by force and targetted strikes against American nuclear facilities.

Iran isn't going to BE firing off nukes and trying to establish a global shiite caliphate, this is all fantasy, many states in the Union have GDPs higher than that of the entire nation of Iran. We have a better chance of being invaded or attacked by an army of Smurfs.

>>It is time the world tuned out the boy who cried wolf, Iran is at best a negligible threat to America, and if Israel is so damned terrified about its existence, then why don't they spend their blood and treasure fixing their problem?<<

Since when have you been interested in the US 'blood and treasure'? You are convinced that Israel and the US is ultimately wrong, stupid, and arrogant.

The truth of Israeli intelligence capabillities is quite contrary to your claims. They have been right quite often - regardless of what you think has happened. The Israelis were right to bomb Saddam's breeder reactor a few years ago. I think they called that one 'right on the money'!

The Israeli intelligence and a US Admiral - a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - had a meeting just last week In Israel. Seems that Israeli intelligence had something to show us. The contents and disposition of that meeting are 'Top Secret'; we do not yet know what it means or what was discussed. It was said that Israel had some new info on Iranian capabillities. It appeared to be a pretty hot item - high priority.

We will have to 'wait and see' when - or if - they will disclose their findings in the press at all.

Stick around Farzad - so I can apologize to you if I am wrong. I hope the hear you reciprocate the same response from you - if I am right.
Can you do that?
Thanks!

It is time the world tuned out the boy who cried wolf, Iran is at best a negligible threat to America, and if Israel is so damned terrified about its existence, then why don't they spend their blood and treasure fixing their problem?

What is clear is that if the NIE came out and claimed Iran had a nuclear weapons program the bush administration would have praised it and used it to beat every war critic over the head until they accepted the drive to another unprovoked attack. But since the NIE contradicts the world view of the rightwing in this country it is unreliable. If the report said what these warmongers wanted, they would be touting it as yet more evidence of how Iran is the cause of the world's problems. Israel that has so many problems with our intel analysis has been saying since the late 1980s that Iran is 2 to 5 years away from a nuclear weapon. NOBODY QUESTIONS THESE SOCALLED ISRAELI INTEL GENIUS EVENTHOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN WRONG ABOUT THEIR TIMELINE FOR TWENTY YEARS AND HAVEN'T CHANGED THEIR PREDICTIONS SINCE I WAS IN MIDDLE SCHOOL. NO ONE QUESTIONS ISRAELI INTEL WHO TOLD US ABOUT SADDAM'S NUCLEAR AND WEAPONS PROGRAM, WHICH BY THE WAY DIDN'T EXIST. Do you socalled patriots see a pattern? Israel's predictions have proven to be wrong, one sided, and always favoring immediate bombing of any muslim nation that threatens them. They pushed for the Iraq war, and now the Israel lobby is pushing for the Iran war.

==I tend to see things somewhere between Jefferson and Lincoln.==

I am kinda like that too - my mind is somewhere between Newton and Einstein.

Just not that famous. But very self-important.

See ya, wisdom man!

No; I saw you losing your cool when you you had resorted to an avenue of personal attacks and claims of Republican dogmas spewing forth. My point was that you ran away from the question of Iranian aggression and began to quote the Democrat dogma - and 'ran home to Mama' to protect the Iranian perspective of US/ME involvement. Your mistake was to attempt to answer a dilemma by answering it with a different dilemma; that doesn't work in any -or is permitted- courtroom I've ever been in.

You didn't win; I didn't win - we both expressed what we see. I can accept that; will you? There's an 'olive branch'..
We will see...

Since you were so interested in the dogma of the Dem's; I just thought that if you were to be interested in how they pan out historically - the 'list' was a way to see what you are trying to protect. It was both humerous and factual. Actually; it would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic - in truth. This is why I switched my preference from the dems to the repubs; not because of this list - but what they stand for and where they want to take this country. Again - I am not a neocon, I am somewhere between Ron Paul and John McCain. I tend to see things somewhere between Jefferson and Lincoln.

You try to stay on a course of logic' - w/no BS; that's OK. Logic is not enough to make decisions by; ultimately wisdom prevails (God willing) and tempers logic. You might reconsider your party choice(that is up to you) - or be up to your popka in socialists. How dangerous is that? Personally, I would rather be up to my popka in alligators - than socialists.

And - no - I just represent my own moniker and do not do anything so loathsome as to use your name - or anybody else's. It is not in my character. It is not in in my best interest to do anything like that.. If I were attempting to 'push a bug up your butt', I would do it by bantering; not slandering/misrepresenting you.

If my investigation technique looks 'pedestrian'; it really means that I am doing it correctly.

Final thoughts
:
"History has shown that democracies fail when the government believes that it can vote for itself benifits that it cannot afford"

"Democracies can be liked to two wolves and a sheep at lunchtime - discussing what to eat"

==Motive is what gets a person out of bed in the morning==

I think it was a famous English writer who said it was the smell of frying bacon that got him out of bed in the morning.

I am with him.

==I read thru you like a book. Don't feel bad; it is my job to do this. I admit that I take my work home with me; but it too easily becomes a habit after it is done long enough.==

OK, bookman, I don't try to hide my ideas.

However, doesn't it bother you that you were incorrect on just about every logical point in this argument? I will answer for you - no it doesn't because that is not the reason you are here.

I think you were "happiest" when you decided to drop the actual argument, which you lost quite roundly and attack party affiliation, in a true Soveit fashion, I must say.

By the way, I speak perfect Russian. I chose not to reply to your silly attempts to "gain confidence". I have been online since before the very first browser was released and have seen pretty much every "technique" at written manipulation.

You are actually quite pedestrian at it.

Better luck next time. At a different forum, I hope. Once exposed, VRIOs(1) like you usually make a hasty retreat.

(1) VRIO - Russian abbreviation of Virtual Information Object (Virtual'nyj Informacionnyj Ob'ect), popularized by Viktor Pelevin, modern Russian writer.

So Dimitry; you apparently do not gavariete poruskiye? See, I can see more from wht you have been writing AND doing than you have fathomed. A good investigator doesn't let on to everything; as there is yet more that I have deduced than I have yet said.

Go back to the bottom of this page - and only read what you have written - and be as objective as you like - then try to read motive into it first. Motive is what gets a person out of bed in the morning; it is the element that fills sails on a sailboat. That makes it clear enough to any investigator what 'floats your boat'.

I read thru you like a book. Don't feel bad; it is my job to do this. I admit that I take my work home with me; but it too easily becomes a habit after it is done long enough.

==You Russian need work.==

As does my English, apparently!

Ouch!

==Dimitry: Zakroite vashu piroshnuyu dirku!==

You Russian need work. Keep you day job.

Dimitry: Zakroite vashu piroshnuyu dirku!

Dimitry,
You can only try so much to reason with people. Some people don't want to understand. Even when you show them where they're wrong, they still keep insisting... or they're like "what if", "what if" and they can have infinite number of "what if"s. Don't waste your time explaining all those "what if"s.
What if tomorrow we find out Iran has an army base in North Pole with missiles pointed at DC?
There's nothing wrong with being wrong, as long as you intend to learn and make it right...

Plainfacto,
You sure fought like a man, till your last bullet, but then at the end what was that democratic party thing?
You can't label anybody who doesn't agree with you to be a member of evil party...
But then wait a minute, isn't it what Bush did?

>> The IR lobbyists (reformists) have manged to deceive the US intelligence agencies and the latest intelligence estimate is the result of that deception.

As far as the facts show, the only lobbyists in US who call themselves Iranian are MKO terrorist who actually sided with Saddam and now are under US protection.

>> In politics whoever is more deceptive and >> illusive wins. So far the Islamic regime >> has outwitted the Americans.

Joke of the day. If Iranians were so good, why's everything so bad that even people like you are living out of Iran!
If they were so witty and clever, Iran was better!

==Did you come to this country and needed to find a party that made sense to you - and found it with the Democrats? Did you find Democrats are more similar to what you were used to?==

Give it a rest, man. I lived here most of my life, coming as a kid.

Article title should be

What to do about William M. Arkin.

I think I'll register www.wishingwellpost.com this am

I have the neocon sites mirrored with MY content - might as well add the post.

I'll be sure NOT to run BP - Exxon and Sierra Leone Diamond ads

I promote values that don't seek to destroy the quality of life for those to follow

NOT that chief Seattle was too far off on whitey.

I spoke too soon

just scrolled up making sure I didn't miss anything in the article.

'AND homeland security'

for that - you must die !

wait - your mortal - that WILL happen.

I don't like this idea of trying to subscribe to the unity of the species through geocoded territorialism - with terms like 'homeland'

whoever came up with 'homeland' should realize - the tectonic plates are in motion -

nothing is permanent.

I promote finding eternal life through developing a social and cultural contract that reaches out to all life, including - WHAT we eat - (I'm not pro cannibal mind you), personalized afterlife ? screw you fundamentalists - !

Bill- just drop the homeland part and this article gets my approval !

jeeeeest a leeeeetle to nazi germany for my tastes.

On this article - Bill fixes things !

Iran has a lot of potential.

indeed.

Did you come to this country and needed to find a party that made sense to you - and found it with the Democrats? Did you find Democrats are more similar to what you were used to? Do you think that it is necissary to constantly attack my character to win your half-arguements? Do you find it necissary to defend the Democrats mantra? Do you have a sense of humor? Can you see why that list 'ticks off' Democrats? Can you see that the democrats are as big of a danger to this country as the ME dilemma? Are you aware of their socialist agegndum? Do you think this banter is going anywhere? Do you think that Arkins page on this subject has swayed from its course and has been milked for what it is worth? Do you think that I am intimidated by your tirade? Do you think that what we say here makes any differnce to what will happen? Do you think that I believe you are adversarial? Do you think that the US is just stupid and arrogant and should just go home and run away from a threat because you don't think it exists? To all of these questions - I already have seen your responses and have noted them all. Maybe we can argue about something else when Arkin puts out something where the poor little Iraninas need you to help with representaion - too!

==You get 'no score' for your attempt to cover up. Real men aren't democrats - either; and they don't need to cover their behinds - you have done this since we began this banter. And that is what your line of reasoning follows (it does); then you are a bad democrat. I am not a Republican but I can say that only good democrats in the office of president can only be counted on one hand. Today's democrats are tomorrows Socialists. It's a free country and you have made a choice. You can always change your mind when you get sick of their reasoning - I did.==

There is no "score", webman. Your "arguments" such as they are, boil down to assumptions of guilt by personal animus, and are devoid of any logical underpinnings. Your feeling are hurt by media reports of Iranian's unpleasant chantings, you are ignorant of commonly known history between the two countries and you are unable to face up to wrongs aleady commited in your name. From that kind of emotional "basis" your contributions to any rational discussion of what should be our policy toward Iran is interesting strictly as an assessment of probable public opinion from a republican base. And so far, it is far from encouraging - no negotiations, more relentless aggression, mistrust and militarism. Cool, dude.

As to your "lists", I am sure there is some republican youth discussion forum where such things may be thought of as "amusing". Good luck!

You get 'no score' for your attempt to cover up. Real men aren't democrats - either; and they don't need to cover their behinds - you have done this since we began this banter. And that is what your line of reasoning follows (it does); then you are a bad democrat. I am not a Republican but I can say that only good democrats in the office of president can only be counted on one hand. Today's democrats are tomorrows Socialists. It's a free country and you have made a choice. You can always change your mind when you get sick of their reasoning - I did.
You may be a democrat if:
1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support
abortion on demand.
2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and
governments create prosperity.
3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are
more of a threat than U.S. Nuclear weapons technology in the
hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.
4. You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding.
5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by
cyclical documented changes in the earth's climate and more affected by
soccer moms driving SUV's.
6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual
is natural.
7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.
8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach fourth graders
how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.
9. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony
activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.
10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually
doing something to earn it.
11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money
to make "The Passion of the Christ" for financial gain only.
12. You have to believe the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts
of the Constitution.
13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.
14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more
important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and
A.G. Bell.
15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but
racial quotas and set-asides are not.
16. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.
17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried is because the right people haven't been in charge.

==You are attempting to ride a bycicle by pushing it along with your feet instead of using the pedals and let the chain and gears make it move. You want to continue to make the US the bad boy after NY 9/11, the Beirut Embassy, and the USS Cole was attacked/destroyed?==

Thanks for making sure that your talking points are aligned with the Republican mantra.

You are simply incapable of looking at reality and understanding the consequences of your actions. If you overthrow a government and install a murderous tyrants, the people in that country will likely hold a grudge against you. Just 'cause you are an ignorant fool and long forgot what you did, does not mean they did.

==Iranian reasoning would say that these events were payback for the past transgressions. But in reality DImitry - these only create escalation from a country that eventually had said 'that is enough; we are going to do something about it'.==

When did we say "enough"? I don't remember anything of the kind, mister. I do remember, a refusal of what looked like a genuine proposal for a negotiated settlement in 2003 and continuous threats of military action all the way untill the recent NIE.

==What would you have done if you were in the position of the president? Give them a great big hug and kiss?==

I would negotiate. In the world of stupid "tough men" that I guess may be equivalent to kissing and hugging.

==No, I only creates escalation - and sometimes they get aggressive back - but only when they have made themselves ready to do so. And they have done just that.==

When they offered full settlement negotiations with no preconditions in 2003 only an hubris filled fool would call it aggression. Why are you behaving as if you are habitually throwing punches when someone looks at you cross-eyed? One doesn't have to talk "tough" to be tough.

==Do you really feel for a poor pityiful weakling Iran because they are being bullied by a US which they have helped to provoke? I'm sorry, they are NOT weak or poor - but they are praying in their mosques to kill Ameicans. Pathetic, yes - but anything but pitiful.==

So, now that you have "imaged" them as praying in their mosques to kill you...does that make you ready to kill them, or at the very least vote for a bafoon that promises to do that for you? And how did they "provoke" us - by insisting that they too can enrich nuclear fuel, just like everybody else in the world is doing? Or was it an attempt to start selling oil in euros, which if successful would crash the already low dollar value?

===I pity their people; not their goals or leadership. They only now want to talk to America - because they believe that we are backing off. And even if we do back off; we do not back down==

Ooh! Tough man don't back down! Tough man fight on! No pasaran!

When your solution to help people is to kill them - look for another solution.

You are attempting to ride a bycicle by pushing it along with your feet instead of using the pedals and let the chain and gears make it move. You want to continue to make the US the bad boy after NY 9/11, the Beirut Embassy, and the USS Cole was attacked/destroyed? Iranian reasoning would say that these events were payback for the past transgressions. But in reality DImitry - these only create escalation from a country that eventually had said 'that is enough; we are going to do something about it'. What would you have done if you were in the position of the president? Give them a great big hug and kiss? No, I only creates escalation - and sometimes they get aggressive back - but only when they have made themselves ready to do so. And they have done just that. Do you really feel for a poor pityiful weakling Iran because they are being bullied by a US which they have helped to provoke? I'm sorry, they are NOT weak or poor - but they are praying in their mosques to kill Ameicans. Pathetic, yes - but anything but pitiful. I pity their people; not their goals or leadership. They only now want to talk to America - because they believe that we are backing off. And even if we do back off; we do not back down. I have to get away for a while - back in fourty minutes.

==The US was attacked - Dimitry. Did they expect for us to go away after the Twin Towers were destroyed? An icebes' chance in hell we would. We ran at them for that.==

Whom? Iraqis, who have died in the hundreds of thousands as a result of our misdirected "retribution"? Are you mad?

==This whole chain of thinking is disconnected from the bycicle chain-link of historical events. Your are disassociating facts and not keeping them linked back to the source of this conflict. They laugh at us - while we argue amongst ourselves about our next moves. And they don't care if they let their children suffer - while they sit on their fat behinds and eat pistachios.==

What are you talking about? Killing a stranger after a crime is worse than stupid - it is evil. We killed untold thousands in retribution for being attacked - the only problem being is these people had nothing to do with the original crime! And we have done this after the crassest, most transparent and obvious propaganda campaign, which was mounted to convince the common man that a far away nation was a threat to him and his family. A campaign that was being started again, this time with Iran as a target. Glad to see you succombed not only once, but twice! Must be those Ruskie geny!

==That is what angers me Dimitry.==

You definitely have anger issues.

==Again -Dimitry- this discussuion began with the point being katuyshas and Iranian-backed suicide squads - and now I am the fool? Bad arguement.. ==

Actually, it is your "argument" is bad, puerile. Why not begin at the beginning - at the time Hizbolah attacked an Israeli outpost, the conflict between Israel and Lebanon has been decades old.

==C'mon - you refuse what accept what happened last year or so. We are talking about Iran and its goals - whether they are seen or not yet seen. These bums show aggresion by the way they use their oil revenues for war and deny their own people - or attack Israel after they bought off Syria and bullied their way into Lebanon to do so. This is out there as a fact; there is no excuse - except for them asking for a bigger fight yet. Anyone can see this as aggression. I'm sure that the Iranian press had their denials ready to go before they even gave the command to go. These are formulaic principals of fighting war - and all elements were present.==

Are you really blind to your own actions, or do you believe to be operating by rules that are different from anyone else's?

When you say "Iran is the aggressor", do you not see that whatever aggression Iran has been able to mount well pales in comparison to the policy of relentless aggression that our nation has been exhibiting for years and especially under the current President?

Do you not even understand that we have recently committed actual bona fide aggressive war against Iran's neighbor, unprovoked and unthreatened, just because we wanted to do so. That is a war crime, according to the United Nations charter, which we essentially wrote after world war II.

They use their oil revenue for war? What war? Iran hasn't attacked another nation in hundreds of years! Their form of government is frankly none of our business. Well we use war for oil revenue! We actually attacked and have taken over a second largest oil resourced nation in the world on the most bogus of pretenses! And we dare accuse the neighboring nations of "aggression", which is double speak for them attempting to prevent complete domination of the ME by a foreign power, i.e. us!

Instead of any sense of humility, the fascist among us veiw any resistance to our illegal occupation and domination as an opportunity to kill more people and subjugate more nations. One hundred military bases in every corner of the world is apparently not enough for our "defensive" needs, we need some more really large ones in Iraq, and while we are at it, how 'bout some in Iran, eh?

==Learn the history of the Israeli/Lebanese conflict from the days of Ben Gurion, which you do not know. Of paricular interest should be the Lebanese prisoner in Israeli custody situation prior to the last war and the history of Israeli/Hizbolah prisoner exchanges==

Again -Dimitry- this discussuion began with the point being katuyshas and Iranian-backed suicide squads - and now I am the fool? Bad arguement..

C'mon - you refuse what accept what happened last year or so. We are talking about Iran and its goals - whether they are seen or not yet seen. These bums show aggresion by the way they use their oil revenues for war and deny their own people - or attack Israel after they bought off Syria and bullied their way into Lebanon to do so. This is out there as a fact; there is no excuse - except for them asking for a bigger fight yet. Anyone can see this as aggression. I'm sure that the Iranian press had their denials ready to go before they even gave the command to go. These are formulaic principals of fighting war - and all elements were present.

==This is what really galls me - we act like we OWN the world! Our generals, without even a sense of irony, say that "we will not allow foreign meddling in Iraq!"==

The US was attacked - Dimitry. Did they expect for us to go away after the Twin Towers were destroyed? An icebes' chance in hell we would. We ran at them for that.

This whole chain of thinking is disconnected from the bycicle chain-link of historical events. Your are disassociating facts and not keeping them linked back to the source of this conflict. They laugh at us - while we argue amongst ourselves about our next moves. And they don't care if they let their children suffer - while they sit on their fat behinds and eat pistachios. That is what angers me Dimitry.

=='They started it first' is your answer? C'mon Dimitry it is a very legitimate line of reasoning. Do you honestly believe that the katyausha attack was anything than a first-strike? They went after civillian targets - comrad; what does this line of attack mean? Provocation - and nothing else. But on a very large scale! And the Israeli going after them took a while - this was very serious thing==

Learn the history of the Israeli/Lebanese conflict from the days of Ben Gurion, which you do not know. Of paricular interest should be the Lebanese prisoner in Israeli custody situation prior to the last war and the history of Israeli/Hizbolah prisoner exchanges.

Of additional interest should be the recent presentations Israeli liasons made in Washington prior to the last war of the preparations for a large scale Lebanese war to commence at an opportune moment. My undersanding is that it was a very nice and informative powerpoint presentation.

The only part that did not work out is the actual defeat of the Hizbolah, and not for the lack of trying on Israel's side. Given the massive tonnage of aerial/artillery munitions used and massive Lebanese civilian toll, the pre-canned war turned out rather badly for Israel, which unfortunately makes the ME more dangerous, as Israel seeks to re-establish deterrent reputation by all means necessary.

If you don't make an effort to learn, you remain a fool.

Sorry, I had give my subaca a walk...

'They started it first' is your answer? C'mon Dimitry it is a very legitimate line of reasoning. Do you honestly believe that the katyausha attack was anything than a first-strike? They went after civillian targets - comrad; what does this line of attack mean? Provocation - and nothing else. But on a very large scale! And the Israeli going after them took a while - this was very serious thing. Or are you argueing with me because you appreciate good bantering?

I must let you know - that I am not having wonderful chicken and potato salad tonite; I am going for Chinese take-out. I'll be back in a while. I can wait ten minutes for a reply - though.

==guess that is easy to see repriasals as aggressions - rather than answering 'freedom fighters'(I'll say it again - what a joke!) with an equal and opposing counterattack.==

My position is that decades into the conflict, it is silly to continuously try "they started it first line". My daugher is not even 10, but even she understands how silly it is.

==It looks as though both sides are well-manned, well-equipped, and well-motivated. This answer does not point out that by Iran's calculations - that all things being equal - they took the lead by an obvious and unexpected attack. Such heroes they are!(joke!)==

Israel is a regional superpower, which won every war against combined militaries of all Arab countries. It has one of the world's best armies, one of the world's best Air Forces and a credible Navy. Iran, has men, but really nothing else to threaten Israel with, and since there is no common border, the human advantage is dubious, at best. Prior to the war, Hizbolah was counted by Israel to have a few thousand men under arms (less than 10k), which is not a force which can "threaten" Israel in any meaningfull sense of that word. Their "victory", such as it is, is to hang in there long enough for the US to finally tell Israel to stop.

==Any attack by a nation or people that didn't even know it was coming(applies only to a few of your examples) draws requests from another nation that may help them. Who helped the Somalis in their aggression? ANd who has helped the opposition?==

OK, wars by proxy are common.

==It would be wierd if they would leave it alone? It's not even their countries (Lebanon and Syria). They have exyended themselves into the situation and makes the scope of the fighting larger - without offering anything that looks like peace. It does look like they intend to dominate - though. Why not; they have put their money where their 'hidden mouth' is..==

Not their country? Are they our countries? We are half way around the world, comrade, and yet carry on like this is a life and death sphere of inluence, to a point that we send large armies to occupy countries in their backyard! Why don't we back off and stop garrisoning hundred and fifty thousand men with a large over the horizon support in their neighboring nations?

This is what really galls me - we act like we OWN the world! Our generals, without even a sense of irony, say that "we will not allow foreign meddling in Iraq!" Our pundits, speak in terms of what we should do in Iraq, as if we bought the damn place. And our citizens, just go along for the ride, long having been propagandized that when American says a part of the world is theirs, everyone else just better move over!

==Well, I can actually.==

And I knew you would.

==Israel has invaded Lebanon multilple times, has violted its airspace continuously for decades and last time filled the south of the country with cluster munitions in violation of their agreements with us on their use.==

I guess that is easy to see repriasals as aggressions - rather than answering 'freedom fighters'(I'll say it again - what a joke!) with an equal and opposing counterattack.

==Arming an opposition group that operates on the border of your adversary is a nasty but completely normal form of asymmetric warfare. It is a natural move for a country with poor modern warfare capability.==

It looks as though both sides are well-manned, well-equipped, and well-motivated. This answer does not point out that by Iran's calculations - that all things being equal - they took the lead by an obvious and unexpected attack. Such heroes they are!(joke!)

==We do this all the time as well, arming the Kurds against Saddam, Ethiopeans against Somalis, Iranian cult separatists against Iran.==

Any attack by a nation or people that didn't even know it was coming(applies only to a few of your examples) draws requests from another nation that may help them. Who helped the Somalis in their aggression? ANd who has helped the opposition?

==One could argue that being stronger militarily than any conceivable combination of nations, we don't have to resort to this kind of games, but we do it nonetheless. Hizbolah did not even exist untill Israel invaded Lebanon in the early 80s and stayed. It would be weird for Iranians NOT to support it. It would be equivalent for Iraqi insurgents to adopt Napoleonic war tactics of forming redoubts and marching in line toward our tanks==

It would be wierd if they would leave it alone? It's not even their countries (Lebanon and Syria). They have exyended themselves into the situation and makes the scope of the fighting larger - without offering anything that looks like peace. It does look like they intend to dominate - though. Why not; they have put their money where their 'hidden mouth' is..

==Who can sit there in front of your computers and read this and not see this was one-sided aggression?==

Well, I can actually. Israel has invaded Lebanon multilple times, has violted its airspace continuously for decades and last time filled the south of the country with cluster munitions in violation of their agreements with us on their use.

Arming an opposition group that operates on the border of your adversary is a nasty but completely normal form of asymmetric warfare. It is a natural move for a country with poor modern warfare capability. We do this all the time as well, arming the Kurds against Saddam, Ethiopeans against Somalis, Iranian cult separatists against Iran. One could argue that being stronger militarily than any conceivable combination of nations, we don't have to resort to this kind of games, but we do it nonetheless. Hizbolah did not even exist untill Israel invaded Lebanon in the early 80s and stayed. It would be weird for Iranians NOT to support it. It would be equivalent for Iraqi insurgents to adopt Napoleonic war tactics of forming redoubts and marching in line toward our tanks.

==That is why I am so cheesed off with you gun swivelling cow boys. ==

Go to dictionary.com and look up "irony".

Don't like gun-toting cowboys; huh? Do you really think Iran has won anything at all? What they HAVE done is create a giant stalemate. We say 'axis of evil' at them because they support, fund, and train 'freedom fighters'(what a joke!) and we say 'you have WMD'.

It really doesn't matter if they have them or not - but it sure makes them stand up and take notice that we are answering their carefully-planned BS program with one of own - to counter it. Is it working? Well 'the fat lady has not yet sung'...

We know Ahmadinejad and his crew sent katuysha rockets and probed the defenses of Israel. Who can sit there in front of your computers and read this and not see this was one-sided aggression? Get off of your 'high horse' and admit what you see. It is well past time...

==You should setup a anti-mullah NGO, based in a friendly sunni arab nation, apply to US funds, get them (should be no problem at all), then use them to manufacture all kinds of false information about Iran's WMD programs, providing nephews and cousins posing as defectors, leak this to war-friendly MSM's "stars" like Michael Gordon, then see this material "explode" on the front page of the NYT and WaPo and appear as "talking points" of mainstream politicians and pundits.==

You can only be fooled once, i.e. the first time around you fell for the existance of WMD but this time you are falling for the non-existance of WMD! It is working as the IR lobbyists like last time have done exactly what you are suggesting.

You are certainly outwitted by the Mullahs. That is why I am so cheesed off with you gun swivelling cow boys.

Dimitry:
==Some think that the entire runup to the invasion of Iraq has been facilitated by the Iran-aligned Iaqi exiles, who have successfully infiltrated the American intelligence gathering process and convinced the American political establishment of the benefits and utility of attacking and taking over Iraq. Thus the dim-witted Americans have done for Iran what it could not have hoped to do by itself - remove the historically hostile Sunni government of Iraq and replace it with Iranian Shiite allies.==

Yes you are right. I do think that.

==The list of those attended should be available. You should be able to find out who is stabbing America in the back!==

So...

If one is unwilling to kill Iranians to free them, one is on Ahmadinejad's payroll?

You should really try to do better.

One thing that worked with vain American journalists before is giving them "scoops" about some nefarious Iraqi "activity", like Chalabi has done for years prepping up the political elite for the Iraqi war.

You should setup a anti-mullah NGO, based in a friendly sunni arab nation, apply to US funds, get them (should be no problem at all), then use them to manufacture all kinds of false information about Iran's WMD programs, providing nephews and cousins posing as defectors, leak this to war-friendly MSM's "stars" like Michael Gordon, then see this material "explode" on the front page of the NYT and WaPo and appear as "talking points" of mainstream politicians and pundits.

If you get Thomas Friedman of NYT advocate for a war with Iran - you have it made! You can start the party and get ready to head up an Iranian ministry after another "shock and awe"!

Give it a try!

A million words mine and people like me and the screams of 60 million Iranians are less valued than a donation of 1 Dollar to the Dems party. At the end of the day the democrats listen to the Iranian and other opportunist businessmen/women who have vested interest in the Islamic Republic. It makes complete sense to believe that the IR spends millions of Dollars to buy off American Congressmen/women, Journalists, and influential people.

The night after his speech at the UN, Ahmadinejad invited some 50 top American Journalists to the hotel were he was staying. Why did he do that? Are American Journalist that cheap to write good stuff about IR and Ahmadinejad in exchange for a free dinner? Or was the offering much more substantial?

The list of those attended should be available. You should be able to find out who is stabbing America in the back!

There are those here who because of their own personal biases want to paint Iran as the supervillain of the middle east responsible for all of our problems with the Islamic world. THIS IS A FALLACY AND AN EXCUSE FOR WHY WE ARE DESPISED BY THE POPULATION OF EVERY SINGLE ISLAMIC COUNTRY IN THE GLOBE.

The truth is that our quest to dominate the middle east against the will of its people is what has caused us to be hated. And guess what we still haven't learned our lesson.

I still would like to see how Iran is a threat to the United States? Iran has no nuclear weapons, won't have them for years, and won't have the means to deliver them to the US by most estimates for two decades. AND EVEN IF IRAN HAS A SECRET WEAPONS PROGRAM, WHICH WE HAVE SEEN NO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF, THERE IS NO REASON THEY WOULD USE THE NUCLEAR MISSILE. STALIN AND MAO KILLED MORE PEOPLE THAN AHMADINEJAD BY BREAKFAST AND WE WERE ABLE TO USE DETERRENCE TO AVOID ANY WAR. And by the way muslims in Pakistan have had nuclear weapons for 10 years, and in fact Pakistan and India's possession of weapons is the principal reason that the two states have begun dialogue and improved their relations. Pakistan and India fought four wars laced with racial and religious tensions, they haven't fought a war since each tested nukes.

THE REAL REASON NO ONE WANTS AN IRANIAN BOMB, IT MEANS THAT ISRAEL AND AMERICA WON'T BE ABLE TO BOMB AND OR PLUNDER IRAN LIKE THEY HAVE DONE TO PALESTINE, LEBANON, SYRIA, AND IRAQ IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. WE DON'T WANT IRAN TO HAVE DETERRENCE, BECAUSE THE NEOCONS AND THE ZIONISTS DREAM IS TO MARCH TO TEHRAN. REMEMBER THE REFRAIN REAL MEN WANT TO GO TO TEHRAN?

==So far the Islamic regime has outwitted the Americans.==

Some think that the entire runup to the invasion of Iraq has been facilitated by the Iran-aligned Iaqi exiles, who have successfully infiltrated the American intelligence gathering process and convinced the American political establishment of the benefits and utility of attacking and taking over Iraq. Thus the dim-witted Americans have done for Iran what it could not have hoped to do by itself - remove the historically hostile Sunni government of Iraq and replace it with Iranian Shiite allies.

Your thinking is along the same lines - dastardly Iranian mullahs have fooled the dumb and naive Americans again, securing for themselves the clear path to nuclear weapons and regional domination.

Given our near complete current dependence on the Iranian mullah's Iraqi shiite allies to keep Iraq even remotely together, I don't see any path that would radically change this situation, even if I accept your premises.

This is what general Odom (sic?) meant when he described the Iraqi situation as "strategic paralysis".

You are chasing a wild goose if you are hoping a reformist or moderate government to take office in Iran and then everything will be alright!! The Islamic regime is fundamentalist and hardliner to the core. The reformists are the safety valves. During the eight years of Khatami, the so called reformist, there was no improvement socially, culturally and economically. Publications continued to be censored, banned and shut down. Iranians continued to be harassed, arrested, tortured, and murdered. Iranians outside Iran were assassinated. It was worse during the Rafsanjani's term.

The reformists and conservatives are both Islamists. The only difference is that the reformists are slightly political in that they are much more illusive than the conservatives. With the conservatives you know where you stand: they are fundamentalists who follow the teachings and interpretations of Qoran and their Imams. The reformists do the same but are underhand. They lead you to believe they are slightly more modern. But in reality they cannot go against what the conservatives stand for. Ahmadinejad is exactly what it says on the tin. whereas the smiling assassin Khatami is much more illusive. If the US is waiting for the reformists to take office in Iran, they better be prepared as they will be dealing with a much more secretive and illusive government that tells you one thing and does another. It is much more likely that the Islamic regime achieve nuclear bomb under the reformist/moderate government than the Ahmadinejad and the conservatives.

It is highly likely that the next government will be a reformists one. The job of the reformists has always been to defuse the explosive situation that the Islamic regime creates by its backward and incompetent strategies and policies based on the Quran, which is completely incompatible with the modern values and principles. The reformists government of Khatami did exactly that: he became known as the safety valve as the Iranians were ripe to explode and a mass uprising was imminent at the time. Khatami made many empty promises to the young and angry population to defuse the explosive situation but never fulfilled any of them. In the end, a year before the end of his term, he revealed his true face when he confirmed his allegiances to the spiritual leader Khamenei and that he believed in every single article of the Islamic Regime's constitution including the Valeyeh, Faghih (the leader= dictator Khamenei) - A week earlier he had stated that the system was undemocratic and needed reform and that the Valey Faghih was undemocratic.

The IR lobbyists (reformists) have manged to deceive the US intelligence agencies and the latest intelligence estimate is the result of that deception. The entire regime reformists and conservatives celebrated the fact that they manged to deceive the Americans.

In politics whoever is more deceptive and illusive wins. So far the Islamic regime has outwitted the Americans.

====I see the government AND those who are working against it as threatening. It's not too different from what I see from you saying. ====

==What are you talking about now?==

You are not fond of Bush- you feel that you are protecting government by saying so. OK; that is patriotism. That is what I mean..

==Now you want to torture government officials?==

Only with boiled kartofel, smetana, e ukrop = vkusniy kartofelniy salat!

====Why do I look into the 'dark ages'? "Those who choose to forget the past are destined to repeat it"====

==You are supposed to know the past so as to NOT repeat it. You appear to be turning to the past TO repeat it.==

Da, da; bolshe kuritsii, pahzhalusta

====As I said earlier, torture can be outlawed - but it always manages to reappear. Why is this true? Because of human nature. That was my point.====

==Child abuse can't be completely eradicated either, but we don't legalize==

People try to legislate the bad in human nature; this why we have laws. Jails are ofr those who break them. Try to indite the people who tortured may Dad and they will tell me to fly thru a donut - won't happen. So we say: OK, we refuse to torture - but we do. And if a incident like 9/11 were to happen again- it will go thru the same donut.

I can't write right now, I am enjoying kuritza...yumm..

==I see the government AND those who are working against it as threatening. It's not too different from what I see from you saying. ==

What are you talking about now?

Now you want to torture government officials?

==Why do I look into the 'dark ages'? "Those who choose to forget the past are destined to repeat it"==

You are supposed to know the past so as to NOT repeat it. You appear to be turning to the past TO repeat it.

==As I said earlier, torture can be outlawed - but it always manages to reappear. Why is this true? Because of human nature. That was my point.==

Child abuse can't be completely eradicated either, but we don't legalize it.

As I said earlier, torture can be outlawed - but it always manages to reappear. Why is this true? Because of human nature. That was my point.

Correction - I didn't mean that 'no one' is watching - I meant that I am satisfied that I am watching.

"It is the duty of every Patriot to protect his country from its government"

- Thomas Paine

Are you surprised to see me use this expression, Dimitry? In my definition of patriotism - I see the government AND those who are working against it as threatening. It's not too different from what I see from you saying.

"Patiotism is the duty of all of its citizens; some of them just take it more seriously than others" - Me! Otherwise - no one is watching all those elements that can contribute to its defeat. Whatever they may look like and wherever they may be found.

Why do I look into the 'dark ages'? "Those who choose to forget the past are destined to repeat it". I don't 'worry' Dimitry; I watch. It's different perspective than worrying.

==When does the thought to protect the US ever comes into your statements?==

I feel well protected.

Why are you so afraid?

==Seeing the effects of totrure is devastating; seeing the effects of what can happen if it is not employed would also be devastating.==

That's a basic popular misconception, that is surprising to hear from someone who had a brush with torture. Great majority of professional interogators agree that torture is a very poor tool for extracting truthful information. In fact our torture program was reversed engineered from the program we always had to resist communist torture - the purpose of the latter was always stated to extract propaganda value from detainees, not the truth.

==Human nature - that deals with war - will always do what it can to minimize human losses and battle-awareness strategy for its side. If it takes a warrant to approve its use - on a per case basis - it would surely send the right signal to the enemies of this country - that we won't hesitate to protect it.

Excuse me, but what the hell are you talking about? Torture has been outlawed by this country and most other western nations for a couple of hundred years. It has been universally recognized as a crime against humanity and was the "calling card" of the world's worst regimes throughout history. Why are Americans advocating this scurge? Are we so afraid that we are willing not only to kill in large numbers but to torture, rape, dismember, crush, burn our suspects to assuade our own pathological fears? Whey not torture children in front of their parents? Parents in front of their children? Do we have no shame, no decency, no pitty, no mercy? I guess some of us don't.

==You know about the Aleansk Cossacks that were killed by Stalin - right? Stalin wouldn't trust those Russians who aided the Briish in order to defeat the Nazis. So you must agree; that war is terrible, hellish, and not to be sought or relished. But once attacked - it sets off a string of events that continue until a victor or a compromise is reached. ==

You live in a world humanity has left many, many years ago. Why you choose to remain in the dark ages is a question you have to answer.

==1). So, why does the U.S.A. believe in forcing its will upon other nations of the world?==

When does the thought to protect the US ever comes into your statements? Bush's buddies (Halliburton - Kellog, Brown + Root - etc..)may have helped themselves to the 'pie' - but the goal is and was - one to hunt down terrorists. Bush's second term was based upon finishing a commitment to the Iraqi people and to hunt for any flavor of terrorist (or 'freedom fighter' - depending on what side of the 'stik' you are on) whether they are AlQaida or Hesballah. It is the way we defended 9/11. Say what you will - but that's it..

The U.S.A. will not be kicked around by any nother nation of the worldd...

1). So, why does the U.S.A. believe in forcing its will upon other nations of the world?

2). And why should other nations of the world recapitulate, and surrender their right to self-determination, to the U.S.A.?

Seeing the effects of totrure is devastating; seeing the effects of what can happen if it is not employed would also be devastating. You will -no doubt- qoute me if you like.

Human nature - that deals with war - will always do what it can to minimize human losses and battle-awareness strategy for its side. If it takes a warrant to approve its use - on a per case basis - it would surely send the right signal to the enemies of this country - that we won't hesitate to protect it.

You know about the Aleansk Cossacks that were killed by Stalin - right? Stalin wouldn't trust those Russians who aided the Briish in order to defeat the Nazis. So you must agree; that war is terrible, hellish, and not to be sought or relished. But once attacked - it sets off a string of events that continue until a victor or a compromise is reached.
Yes?

==Sometime one looks around and doesn't even recognize this country any more==

Since the ME has flared into the limelight of world news - it hasn't been the country as it was known historically. I can site the ME problems affecting the US and EU; not just the oil. Israel and its formation in 1948 changed things; so did the aquistion of nuclear weapons. There were other key events.

My Dad died eight monthes before 9/11; but he confided with me on what he knew and suspected what was happening in the ME. One of his earielst OSS posts was in Africa, Turkey, and thruout the ME during WWII. If I continue to write on this blog and the subject warrents these things to be brought into the open - I will do what I can to make them as clear as I can without divulging spy tradecraft.

This counrty does well to adapt quickly to the situation, Dimitry. Remember what Frank said 'if it doesn't - you get to toss the bums out every couple of years. My Dad used to tell me the very same thing.

I believe that it is safe to say - that you are seeing the historical adaptation occuring while in the US; not reading about it second-hand. And your vote and voice is always noted if you can make your case clear and to the point. And you are a part of it. You know by now, that is just how it works. And if the US has inspired other countries to reach for this watermark - so much the better for them.

I would like to see the Mullahs of Iran be minimized - so that Iranian individual citizens are not bullied or coerced into their vote. I certainly would be the best thing that Iranian leaders could give to their children. More freedom to choose, and to improve their living conditions for all. They have the money to do these things; it is a question if they lack to fortitude to reach this goal.

==Alan Derschewitz's proposal may be hidious; but it is - at least - not hypocritical.==

Well, I can't say that hideous is better than hypocritical.

Torture warrants were a staple during the Enquisition and afterwards.

It is inconceivable that modern day law professor from a reknowned university would seriously advocate a return the Middla Age legal practices.

But there isn't any outcry over this. In fact, Republicans in Congress just blocked specific legislation that would have outlawed CIA torture (already illegal under numerous domestic and binding international legislation). It barely made the front page of most papers!

Sometime one looks around and doesn't even recognize this country any more.

Thanks for that Sun-Herald news article. Maybe the Iranian's are finally trying to boot out Ahmadinejad's crew.

You might see Arkin's ten-point plan as naiive; but it is meant as a gesture of peace. That doesn't mean that it lacks respectabilityy or sincerity. It is trite and to the point; like a child's faith. The best kind.

Alan Derschewitz's proposal may be hidious; but it is - at least - not hypocritical. The Chinese and N Koreans that tortured my Dad weren't signers of the Geneva Convention or any other restrait. that is why it would difficult - if not impossible - for us to make a barrier that would be broken right away if war were to break out tomorrow. We should not kid ourselves; that's all.

To the so called Iranian:
>> M is an Islamic regime lobbyist here who is giving you loads of misleading information about the nature of the Islamic regime.
M is a movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472855/plotsummary
What are you?

>> If the regime helped the UN forces in Afghanistan to get rid of the Taliban regime, it was in their own interest.

Where have you been last 30 years? That aside, have you read all the other posts? Of course they did it in self interest, and that's what everybody is saying through and through, that they're doing everything based on self interest, not based on messianic random-value agenda.
Glad to see even "you" can see it, with all your hatred.

>> It is hypocritical for us to asy that we - or anybody else is above it.

Plainfacto,
Problem is, founding fathers had a vision. Constitution is based on vision, and this country is built on that great vision.

They knew something when they said torture is not good, and I buy into their vision because I've seen how their vision works.

==Do you know what really ticks me off about this talk about torture? It is hypocritical for us to asy that we - or anybody else is above it. There has never been a time in history where a country at war with another didn't do it.==

Well, some of us beleive that this country is kind of special and can rise above the historical trend!

What also is very problematic is the institutionalization of torture, where torture becomes part of the law, not an aberation but the "new normal". Some people (Alan Dershowitz, for example) want to see "torture warrants" issued by the judges...It's horrible.

==M is an Islamic regime lobbyist here who is giving you loads of misleading information about the nature of the Islamic regime. He is in other words Bu****itting his way through the arguments. Every single assertion about the Islamic regime he is making is false and misleading.==

If "M" here is working for an Iranian government (highly unlikely), than "Iranian" surely is working for another government in the region.

Iran does have elections and we want to see a moderate government emerging next time around. Nobody here supports the current government of Iran. But most people here refuse to accept war as "solution" to the conflict between the two countries.

------------------------------------------
Iran reformists form coalition to end 'crisis'
by Hiedeh Farmani

December 15, 2007 12:03am

IRANIAN reformists announced a coalition inspired by ex-president Mohammad Khatami to win back parliament and save Iran from the "crisis" they said was created by his successor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The coalition brings together 21 moderate parties, including the allies of ex-presidents Khatami and Akbar Hashemi Ranfsanjani, to fight conservatives in the legislative elections on March 14.

"The country is in serious crisis. All parties agree that they should restore the parliament's position and curb the government's inexpert activities," spokesman Abdollah Naseri said.

Officials said the guiding light of the coalition was Khatami, president from 1997-2005, who in recent weeks has broken two years of virtual political silence to lambast Ahmadinejad in a series of speeches.

"Khatami was behind this coalition. He is one of the pillars of consolidating reformists for the next election," another spokesman, Morteza Haji, said.

The coalition includes the largest reformist party, Islamic Iran Participation Front, and the Executives of Construction Party, founded by ex-cabinet members from the 1989-1997 presidency of the pragmatic Rafsanjani.

It is also joined by Khatami's party, the Association of Combatant Clerics, and the Organisation of Islamic Revolution Mojahedeen, whose members served as key lawmakers in the previous parliament.

The other major pro-reform party, the National Confidence Party, headed by former parliament speaker Mehdi Karroubi, will have about 80 per cent common candidates with the coalition, Naseri said.

Reformists, who had the majority in the previous parliament, are concerned about a repetition of the February 2004 polls, which suffered a low turnout and saw thousands of their candidates banned from standing by the conservative electoral watchdog, the Guardians Council.

-------------------------------------------
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22928071-5005961,00.html

M is an Islamic regime lobbyist here who is giving you loads of misleading information about the nature of the Islamic regime. He is in other words Bu****itting his way through the arguments. Every single assertion about the Islamic regime he is making is false and misleading.

He is painting the Islamic terrorist regime as a good regime that wants to get along with the US!! What a load of b*****t! The Islamic regime sees the US and Israel as its main enemies even though the US (Jimmy Carter) helped them to overthrow the old regime and was the first to recognise it. It is all documented. Khomeini declared the US as the great Satan and Russia as the little Satan. He declared them both as the enemies of his regime. Every Friday, their Friday prayer Imams incite the people to kill Americans and call for the annihilation of Israel. The most recent Imam suggested that "death to America" should be every single Muslim's mantra!

If the regime helped the UN forces in Afghanistan to get rid of the Taliban regime, it was in their own interest. The Islamic regime wants to be the leader of the Islamic world (57 Islamic states)and establish itself as a supper power. This is why they are pursuing nuclear technology and bombs.

Arkin's ten moves here is very naeve and simplistic.

Do you know what really ticks me off about this talk about torture? It is hypocritical for us to asy that we - or anybody else is above it. There has never been a time in history where a country at war with another didn't do it. It doesn't matter if it is against the law in this counrty - or if it isn't allowed in the Geneva Convention - it will still be done. The Chinese and North Koreans that tortured my Dad are reknowned for being experts in the field of torture. Especially if you are an intelligence agent gathering field intelligence of an opposing government - forget it - it is a done deal. It will happen. We may not like the idea that it happens - but just forget about trying to legislate it. If we were to be attacked severely tomorrow - we will do what we must do to defend this country. And any country that claims they don't torture or haven't torures is full of $#!+. They will be lying to you with their eyes and mouth wide open. It is an ugly thing and can only be stopped when all wars have come to an end. May it be soon.

==Your mom might have spent years teaching you Russian, be she sure didn't give you sixth sense, or you know all these first hand?
Ahmadinejad didn't make Iranian's believe Holocaust is a myth.==

His denials on American TV is already part of the way we percive his ability to lie. He outraged many Americans - both Jews and mostly non-Jews.

==Itanian's don't believe it's a myth, FYI the most popular TV program of Iranian TV last season was called "zero degree orbit". Do a search and you'll see it's about Jews who were killed in Holocaust (and an Iranian who gives them Iranian passport to save them from concentration camps. Story is based on truth).==

Well, I can only say that I am glad to hear that Iranian TV covered the story; I have not seen it and cannot say how truthful it was. For the sake of the Iranian people - I can only hope it was correct.

==Now again, if you read more into internal Iranian politics, the Iranian equivalent of David Frum (is called Dr. Ramin, a blond Iranian, after all) explains why Ahmadinejad had to bring Holocaust to the front: attack your enemy where it hurts.==

I'm not sure of what you wrote; but if meant to attack the Israelis and the truthfulness of their claim - I must say that I didn't see it and therefore I cannot say anything either way.

==Israel has gained a lot of leverage based on Holocaust, so by doubting it, you can doubt shake all that leverage.==

Ameicans have been taught about the Holocaust their whole lives; I know that I seen movie footage since I was twelve years old. There is a saying in this country that needs to be said here: 'Those who do not learn from history - are destined to repeat it'.

==Now Ahmadinejad himself has said multiple time that "even if Holocaust is true, why should Palestinians pay for it -therefore implying that Holocaust has actually happened."==

If?? IF??!!?? Saying it that way makes me wonder if he DOES belive it.

==I personally agree that genocide is not a matter of playing with, just for political use, but I can see at the same time the argument of Ahmadinejad camp who calls mass murdering of Palestinians genocide, too.==

To use this argument is to say that Israel killed Palestinains without provocation. You can believe what you want, but it is founded by Ahmadinejad - the one who first claimed that the Holocaust was a myth - Beware!

==The burden of decision (of who's right and how much) is upon a fair and just mind, again.==

Just keep telling what you know and everything is OK

==And while you're at telling us what Ahmadinejad made Iranians believe, please note that in Iran's history courses (in middle and high school) they actually talk (or at least used to, first hand experience here) about Holocaust.==

I guess that Ahmadinejad was skipping out on school that day!

==Also, please note that some Jews believe it's a sin for Jews to have a homeland, because God ordered them to be spread around the world because of their sins, so "Biblically based homeland" is not totally correct==

Yes, they had been scattered away from Israel because of their sinful ways that the did not turn from. God allowed it for a season, and they found themselves back when God called them to return. This happened for a few times in the Old Testament. You may not believe that the New Testament claims that Israel would become a nation again - but as you can see - they already have!

>>You know how enraged Americans were over this event. They all wanted some payback. Bush knew that would be necissary to appease Americans to go after terrorists and bring them to justice.

I wish Bush had finished all Taliban and Al Qaeda. Taliban killed Iranian reporters and diplomats in 2000, which brought Iran and Afghanistan to the brink of a full fledge war, with Iran having two legions at the Afghan border for a year, but still not daring to attack.
I once saw a video an Iranian reporter sent from Afghanistan and couldn't sleep for months.
I still wish those people were brought to justice. Alas it didn't happen.

==The war in Iraq and Afghanistan began in earnest after the 9/11 attacks - you were here at the time Dimitry. You know how enraged Americans were over this event. They all wanted some payback. Bush knew that would be necissary to appease Americans to go after terrorists and bring them to justice.==

Well, had he done that we would be in a different place today. Unfortunately, he and his buddies couldn't resist taking a few pieces more.

==I am not a war monger, my Dad was captured gathering intelligence in the Korean War - and was brutally tortured. My Mom said he was never the same man that he used to be. I watched my my Dad being tortured with his memories as he sat quietly at the table in the den - talking and struggling with himself. For me; I know it is a terrible thing - it deprived of the best part of my own Dad which I never got know. I know the cost of war - and I am not fond of it at all. If the event of 9/11 did not occur, things would have been different. I'm sorry that you feel disappointed Dimitry, and I sympathize with you.==

After 9/11, when we were all at a funeral of our friend who died on one of the planes, I suggested that if we could recognize ourselves in a few years we were doing well. I am not sure that are doing well at all. We are having an active national debate on applicability and appropriatness of torture, with a significant portion of our leadership ready and willing to take a detour into the Dark Ages. The numbers of casualties that result from our actions post 9/11 is undoubtedly in the hundreds of thousands. Our leadership is pursuing a foreign policy of relentless aggression, to the detriment of America's reputation, respect and international standing. In a few short years, we have changed from a country that was the envy of the world and an object of emulation, to a country that is considered a major source of aggression and instability by most people in the world. Yet, we appear to be largely oblivious to all of this - I last heard that the war is losing front row status in people's voting patterns.

A lasting history of 9/11 appears to be shock that morphed into anger and congealed to hate.

>>Ahmadinejad has made this outrageous claim to deceive the people of Iran in believing that the holocaust is a myth! And for what purpose? Of course - it would be to deny the rights of the Israelis of their biblically-based homeland.

Plainfacto,
Your mom might have spent years teaching you Russian, be she sure didn't give you sixth sense, or you know all these first hand?
Ahmadinejad didn't make Iranian's believe Holocaust is a myth. Itanian's don't believe it's a myth, FYI the most popular TV program of Iranian TV last season was called "zero degree orbit". Do a search and you'll see it's about Jews who were killed in Holocaust (and an Iranian who gives them Iranian passport to save them from concentration camps. Story is based on truth).
Now again, if you read more into internal Iranian politics, the Iranian equivalent of David Frum (is called Dr. Ramin, a blond Iranian, after all) explains why Ahmadinejad had to bring Holocaust to the front: attack your enemy where it hurts. Israel has gained a lot of leverage based on Holocaust, so by doubting it, you can doubt shake all that leverage.
Now Ahmadinejad himself has said multiple time that "even if Holocaust is true, why should Palestinians pay for it" therefore implying that Holocaust has actually happened.
I personally agree that genocide is not a matter of playing with, just for political use, but I can see at the same time the argument of Ahmadinejad camp who calls mass murdering of Palestinians genocide, too.
The burden of decision (of who's right and how much) is upon a fair and just mind, again.

And while you're at telling us what Ahmadinejad made Iranians believe, please note that in Iran's history courses (in middle and high school) they actually talk (or at least used to, first hand experience here) about Holocaust.

Also, please note that some Jews believe it's a sin for Jews to have a homeland, because God ordered them to be spread around the world because of their sins, so "Biblically based homeland" is not totally correct.

Take heart my friend. I trust the ==Constitutional system more than I trust the men and women elected to serve in it. And eventually the press DOES gets off its duff and do its job. And Americans DO eventually get smart and recognize BS when they hear it. And, of course (here comes the best part) ... Every two years or so, we get a chance to throw the bums out.==

That is a very measured view, that I have heard from other native borns.

While it is certainly true, America's power and current pre-eminent position in the world makes a single successful demagogue supremely dangerous, not just for our future, but for the world as well.

==We are talking about biblical history, and it is necissary for Ahmadinejad to deny all that he can to keep up his attack on Israel. Farzad is having a hard time finding this out; It must be a blow and a shock after Ahmadinejad filled them up with his BS. They need to know, this truth is important.==

I don't Ahmadinejad views on this are widely sharedy by Iranians. For example, their recent holocaust TV drama was very popular country wide, from what I understand. So it looks like he has failed again. And he did not "fool" Farzad, either, though it would be a neat argument for you to make, had it been true. So Ahmadinejad's clumsy and foolish attempts at propaganda have been laguhable, unlike Bush, who succeeded for several years.

The war in Iraq and Afghanistan began in earnest after the 9/11 attacks - you were here at the time Dimitry. You know how enraged Americans were over this event. They all wanted some payback. Bush knew that would be necissary to appease Americans to go after terrorists and bring them to justice.

General Sherman - of the American Civil War once said that 'war is terrible - there is no denying it'. General Robert E. Lee said 'It is good that war is so terrible; so that we should not grow fond of it'.

I am not a war monger, my Dad was captured gathering intelligence in the Korean War - and was brutally tortured. My Mom said he was never the same man that he used to be. I watched my my Dad being tortured with his memories as he sat quietly at the table in the den - talking and struggling with himself. For me; I know it is a terrible thing - it deprived of the best part of my own Dad which I never got know. I know the cost of war - and I am not fond of it at all. If the event of 9/11 did not occur, things would have been different. I'm sorry that you feel disappointed Dimitry, and I sympathize with you.

Dimitry writes;

-- My biggest dissapointment is the realization that Americans were just as susceptible to government propaganda as the Soviet citizens were to communist propaganda. ... A few years ago, I thought that government propaganda would be ineffective here, due to the education and political savvy of the population."

I guess you have to ask the question: "Where was the free press while all this propaganda was being dumped on the masses?" I mean, isn't it their role in a democracy to keep the government honest?

Take heart my friend. I trust the Constitutional system more than I trust the men and women elected to serve in it. And eventually the press DOES gets off its duff and do its job. And Americans DO eventually get smart and recognize BS when they hear it. And, of course (here comes the best part) ... Every two years or so, we get a chance to throw the bums out.

C'mon Dimitry; you know that in a time of war - the first casualty of war is truth. That is a very old saying. And it is true - even if that war happens to be a 'Cold' one. In fact, the propaganda was going to an from the USSR and the US constantly - as I remember it growing up here.

Ahmadinejad has made this outrageous claim to deceive the people of Iran in believing that the holocaust is a myth! And for what purpose? Of course - it would be to deny the rights of the Israelis of their biblically-based homeland. The 'Dome of the Rock' is a Muslim mosque that is built where? On the site of King Solomon's Temple.

We are talking about biblical history, and it is necissary for Ahmadinejad to deny all that he can to keep up his attack on Israel. Farzad is having a hard time finding this out; It must be a blow and a shock after Ahmadinejad filled them up with his BS. They need to know, this truth is important.

As you already know Dimitry - my Dad was an OSS Agent that seen those Nazi attrocitiy reports. It was real.

Did you know that my momachka was a Russian - born in St. Petersburg? My mom's Dad used to shoot pool with the last Tsar of Russia, he was a General. I just thought you might like to know.

==I am not exactly fond of President Bush - but he and his staff tell the American public what they can rather than make up such an awful propaganda ploy as Ahmadinejad has done==

Oh no you don't. Ahmadinejad can't hold a candle to the efficient and successful propaganda mounted by Bush to drag the country into a war with Iraq.

My biggest dissapointment is the realization that Americans were just as susceptible to government propaganda as the Soviet citizens were to communist propaganda. I found much in Bush's approach that I have already seen growing up in the Soviet Union - racheting up of the external threat, domonization of adversaries, cowing of internal opposition by accusation of "supporting the enemy", glorification of the national political system.

Ahmadinejad can only get laughs in America and be rediculed by the main stream press. Bush, on the other hand, gets direct quotes of the most outlandish lies printed in all the papers with no comments and respectful press conferences.

A few years ago, I thought that government propaganda would be ineffective here, due to the education and political savvy of the population. I now know better.

Farzad,

I belive you're probably correct about the technological difficulties of building a "suitcase" nuclear weapon.

But of course, of all the scenarios in which a terrorist could deliver a nuclear weapon within the US, use of a nuclear suitcase bomb is by far and away the least liking. I mean, why not just load a full size bomb on a 16-wheeler and drive it across the border? Or bring it into Los Angeles or New York on a shipping container?

The Congressional Research Service prepared a politically-unbiased review of nuclear terrorism threat and responses for Congress in Feb, 2005. It outlined a number of postulated scenarios by which a terrorist group could smuggle a nuclear weapon into the US. Suitcase bombs weren't one of them. It's a pretty good read if you care to take the time. (www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL32595.pdf)

As for the urgency of dealing with the threat .. I agree with you to a certain extent. At present, there is certainly time -- time to ascertain the true nature and extent of the threat (if any), and then hopefully time to pursue other avenues beside military action in dealing with that threat.

And I suppose that is what Arkin designed his 10 Point Plan to do.

==Plainfacto-how have you become the expert on Russian translations. Where do you get this stuff? Vladimir putin who is right next door to Iran and is hardly and Islamist for all the faults he possesses opposes our policy he doesn't seem too worried.==
My mom was Russian; how many languages do you speak at your house? Putin may oppose our policies but he not a lover of BS either - give him some credit.
He wasn't pleased!

==Certainly, Ahmadinejad's comments on the holocaust denial are stupid. I believe that his line that the holocaust is somehow in doubt is grotesque.==
Yes; it is hidious and nuts to claim these people weren't exterminated. My Dad was an OSS Agent and saw the intel reports on Nazi attrocities. Pretty sick stuff. Why would someone want to exterminate a people that didn't even have a country of their own? Could be the reason that Ahmadinejad is in denial of the facts; maybe he cannot face gross realities. If it is his character flaw - it a huge one!

==Your focus on Ahmadinejad is misplaced. Not that the Iranian regime doesn't have serious issues, but the current strategy will only lead to major instability and problems throughout not only the middle east but here as well.==
Is it a little hard to accept that Ahmadinejad COULD be in denial for the purposes of his own propaganda? It sure looks like this to anyone who knows the about Nazi attrocities. How would you feel about it all - if the tables were turned on you?

==AND I STILL DON'T BUY THE MADE UP THREAT AGAINST ISRAEL, THAT WHOLE THING IS A PLANTED STORY USED FOR PROPAGANDA, IN 1939 GERMAN NEWSREELS CLAIMED THAT POLISH TROOPS ATTACKED GERMANY, THIS IS JUST A PROPAGANDA STORY TO JUSTIFY AND ISRAELI ATTACK IF IT HAPPENS.==
If you still feel that Ahmadinejad is the beginning and end of truth; you may also be in denial. The fact that the Germans put out this propaganda; maybe it is time to accept the Holocost as a historical event rather than a propaganda plan of Ahmadinejad to decieve his own people. I am not exactly fond of President Bush - but he and his staff tell the American public what they can rather than make up such an awful propaganda ploy as Ahmadinejad has done - and may very well be doing now. He has already proved himself as a liar because of this denial. That's a pretty big lie.

Plainfacto-how have you become the expert on Russian translations. Where do you get this stuff? Vladimir putin who is right next door to Iran and is hardly and Islamist for all the faults he possesses opposes our policy he doesn't seem too worried.

Certainly, Ahmadinejad's comments on the holocaust denial are stupid. I believe that his line that the holocaust is somehow in doubt is grotesque. Your focus on Ahmadinejad is misplaced. Not that the Iranian regime doesn't have serious issues, but the current strategy will only lead to major instability and problems throughout not only the middle east but here as well.

AND I STILL DON'T BUY THE MADE UP THREAT AGAINST ISRAEL, THAT WHOLE THING IS A PLANTED STORY USED FOR PROPAGANDA, IN 1939 GERMAN NEWSREELS CLAIMED THAT POLISH TROOPS ATTACKED GERMANY, THIS IS JUST A PROPAGANDA STORY TO JUSTIFY AND ISRAELI ATTACK IF IT HAPPENS.

I WANT ONE OF THESE PEOPLE THAT FAVORS AGRESSIVE ECONOMIC AND MILITARY WARFARE AGAINST THE IRANIAN REGIME TO ANSWER A QUESTION FOR ME?

If the Iranians spends tens of billions to build a nuclear bomb, you think they are going to hand that bomb to a third party independent contractor?

Secondly, miniturized nuclear weapons are even harder to produce than Intercontinental ballistic missiles. One of the difficulties, and this is a laymen's understanding with all these ridiculous hypotheticals of Iran giving its non-existant A bomb to terrorists. THIS WHOLE TV SHOW 24 INSPIRED SUIT CASE BOMB IS ABOUT AS RIDICULOUS AS IRAN BLOWING US ABOUT WITH A KLINGON DEATH RAY. WHY? BECAUSE MINITURIZATION OF AN EXPLOSIVE NUCLEAR CHARGE IS HIGHLY ADVANCED WAY BEYOND THE TECHNICAL CAPACITIES OF THE IRANIAN REGIME. THE SOVIETS WEREN'T ABLE TO DEVISE THESE TYPES OF WEAPONS TILL THE 70S OR 80S AND THEY POSSESSED SOME OF THE GREATEST MATHEMETICIANS AND PHYSICISTS OF THE 20 TH CENTURY. IRAN IS AT LEAST BY BEST ESTIMATE 15-20 YEARS AWAY FROM BEING ABLE TO BUILD BALLISTIC MISSILES AND PROBABLY 50-70 YEARS AWAY FROM BUILDING A HIGH TECH SUITCASE NUKE, DO YOU REMEMBER THE FIRST CELLPHONES THAT IS WHAT THEIR FIRST A BOMB WILL IF, IF THEY ARE TRYING TO BUILD ONE.

Sorry for again interspersing logic into these paranoid terror tales that Edgar Allan Poe another Washington native could not imagine. SO, JUDGING THAT ALL OF THE LAST OH 15 POSTS ON FORENSIC NUCLEAR ARE NOW REALLY MOOT. WHO CARES, NO ONE HAS SEEN A WEAPONS PROGRAM, AND YOU NEED A HIGHLY ADVANCED WEAPONS PROGRAM AND YEARS OF TESTING TO EVEN CONSIDER GETTING TO ICBMS AND SUIT CASE NUKES.

So if Iran won't be able to deliver a nuke even assuming the worst case scenarios until Ahmadinejad is in a retirement home why the phoney urgency of this threat?

Now that's a very good point to bring forward, that US foreign policy is based on self-interest. I'd love to agree. Lets take a closer look.
Lets also have a concrete definition of self-interest. There's short term interests and long term interests. As an example of short term US interest, is keeping gas low and national economy booming. US long term interest can be keeping world a safe place (hence keeping US safe). These two are not necessarily same or even at the same direction. Sometimes to gain long term interests, you should compromise on short term interests. Iraq war was definitely for short term interests (of coercing other regional countries to submission) which endangered long term interests (making it a hotbed of terrorists). Bush Sr.'s decision of first gulf war and leaving Shia's to be suppressed was obviously a wrong long term decision too (as we can see now).
A good foreign policy is the one that can find that fine line between short term interests and long term interests.
My personal opinion, a good policy is one that's based on real "values". Spreading democracy will spread prosperity, happy people won't term into suicide bombers. Peace in Palestine will diffuse and take a big gun out of many extremist's hands. Very simply saying, follow the right path, and you end up good.

I wish US foreign policy was in the best interest (short or long) of American nation, but obviously it is not.
There's no denying that most of US policy (domestic or international) is dictated by lobbyists (take a walk in K Street). Lobbyists don't necessarily work in the interest of whole nation (theory of capitalism - capitals tends to stay within few) and therefore policy is shaped to serve those who favor it, not necessarily the whole nation.
Very fortunately, founding fathers were real smart in having all the checks and balance systems as there is now, but then still there are a lot of loopholes to exploit (which're exploited).
Smarter than 10 people is 11.
Now in our case, think about the powerful lobbying powers in US and you'll see how US policy is shaped, towards Iran.