odd, you pick two reputable uk newspapers for british opinion and a not very reliable blog for German. Whats wrong with Die Zeit? or Süddeutsche Zeitung? I'd settle for Bild Zeitung if it showed you could be bothered to at least spin through opinions in the world.

Not all of the most sensible or stupid stuff is written in english. the USA is full of people who speak other languages, why can't your media employ some of them to help broaden understanding.

This lack of interest in my opinion is, frankly, nuts.

This is a good article, but when have the USA backed down, especially if it would require them to acknowledge the legitimacy of the Iranian regime; the withdraw of the "axis of evil" statement; and then removal of accusations of Iran's links to terrorism/freedom fighters. Even if the USA felt that this may some how be in its interest the Israelis wouldn't allow it and would drag the USA back.

There is another way. It would require the USA to acknowledge that it does not have the right, or moral standing to be the Judge, Jury and Executioner. Only then will the end of the war on Terrorism start.

Freinds, what is inevitably about to happen can be avoided. We have the equivelent of a kindergartener with a temper tantrum behind the controls of what is about to become a runaway train. My generation will have to deal with the consequences for years to come. If my fellow Americans don't stand up right now and take some notice and action. I will never, ever forgive my parent generation. WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!!

In reality, this issue is not an American issue at all. It is a Middle Eastern issue, Nuclear Israel vs. Nuclear Iran. The outcome would be devastating for the region and it would effect the world’s oil production.

The US, being the world’s largest consumer of oil, has an economical interest in this dilemma, but the US military will not get involved.

Would or could this bring stability to the region? It would probably take 50 years or so (Refer to the US and Russia Cold War). Neither country can afford the real cost of nuclear war.

In conclusion, the best thing to do is nothing...ok, there will be some politicians making statements and threats should be made but at the end of the day neither side will make any real move.

At least that is what we all hope for.

Farhad,

Why does it seem you are more interested in ending the War on Terrorism, than on ending terrorism itself? I think you have overplayed your hand and stated your intentions a little too clearly.

Iran is a terrorist state that openly seeks the ultimate weapon, while maintaining long-standing calls for the eradication of Israel. It is no great stretch to see that a nuclear Iran would try to destroy Israel as soon as it thought it was possible. Before dying, the Israeli counterstrike is certain to exact a horrible toll of its own. All told, tens of millions will die in this ever-more-likely scenario, and the Middle East will become inhabitable for thousands of years because of nuclear radiation.

The projected and all-but-promised Islamic first strike will clearly mark Islam as an aberration; a threat to all humanity. I doubt any of the “civilized” nations will think twice about unleashing their own arsenals, conventional or otherwise, in smashing other Islamic states that can be seen as a threat to those not already killed by the Iranian-triggered war.

Islam will be smashed, consigned to the ash-heap of history with other failed religions of past centuries. Is this the future you want for Islam? That is the path you are choosing.

If western powers back down now, Iran will end your world, and your religion, and the only solace you will find is that you outlasted the Israelis by a breath.

This is the future Iran would choose for you. I suggest you find another way.

It will be proven shortly how disasterous it is for the humankind all if the world does not deter even forcefully Iran, a country of religious madness, from making any nuclear bomb. Iran will detonate the nuke like the religious fanatics did in the airplane, bus, subway, etc. because there in no check and balance in their politics heavily colored by the mad religion.

The best thing the usa could hope for is for their evil gov. to back off now and to leave Iraq and not step foot on Holy Islamic land ever again enemy's are not welcomed there, and do not even think twice about stepping foot on Iran's soil because you will not take another step again any where,remember the usa is the world terrorist and maybe just maybe if you back off now as most are cowards maybe Iran and N. Korea and Venezuela will not wipe out the entire usa.

Elections coming. Need to rally Americans behind. Time to "wag the dog". U.S. media are already very active at it. "Showdown Iran" is already in the making.

Once again, all the Bob Owens of the world make it all too clear:

Unilateralism and considering others irrelevant means nothing remains to be said.

Unilateralism and considering others irrelevant means war, everlasting war.

Lao Tseu: "War should be treated like a funeral service. Even victory is a funeral".

Be prepared to die and to mourn!

Scott Ring: Coraggio!

Why is everyone getting so excited about another Nation getting their hands on what they (Those who sout loudest , such as USA , UK, Israel, France , Germany .... ) already have (This I make the stupid assumption that Iran has the will or the intent to aquire the forbidden weapon ).
have the existing powers blown each other apart? . would america dared nuke a nuclear Japan in 1945 ? . I think the whole world should be cleared of nuclear arsenal , starting with the five permanenr members of the security council , followed by the junior partners ....

Bush and his administration need to respect Iran’s and other countries’ sovereignty. I don’t understand the rational behind the fact that America is talking about using nuclear weapons against Iran, so Iran would not be able to develop nuclear weapons. If America has the right to possess such technology, all other sovereign countries should have the same right. If the trend is to stop countries from developing such weapons, America should first stop talking about using them against other countries. A military conflict would make things much worst.
It is also interesting to note that Iran had nothing to do with terrorist attacks on America, and there has never been an Iranian terrorist. Iranians are peaceful, educated and highly sophisticated individuals and should not be regarded as terrorists. It is all too clear that the conflict is about OIL.

the bigger story is that i just added a 3rd gas tank to my SUV, how am I going to afford filling it up now??

Go Team America!

I have already written to my elected officials calling for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, but I don't think Congress has the brains or guts to do it. I can only hope the Joint Chiefs of staff will refuse to act on an illegal order. It is an illegal order!
If you read the Herst article,you have some idea of the consequences of a nuclear attack. I would also suggest that you look on the web for information on the consequences of the Chernobyl nuclear accident. That was one nuclear power plant! Can you imagine the results of a deliberate attack on several Nuclear power plants. Radioactive fallout would follow the wind,and the wind always changes direction. The effects of such an attack would be felt worldwide. The Indian subcontinent would be heavily saturated, as would the Middle East including Israel. Everytime the wind shifted another region would be effected. It would be a nuclear holocaust. Nothing in the Middle East would be worth it.
God! These people are stupid.

We will have to fight the Iranians sooner or later. It is a religously driven country. A religion whose doctrine declares that they kill or convert YOU!

I say we fight them sooner rather than later. We cannot allow them to develop a nuclear weapon. And to those who would spin, you do not need enriched uranium for nuclear power, there are many other materials that could be substituted. However you do need uranium for weapons.

War is to come eventually, and if war is to come, let it come now.

War is not inevitable. Talk gently carry a big stick.

It is shame for US goverment that instead of promoting peace it is planing for another war.

I Stongly agree with Bob Owens.

Right now Iran is planning a pre-emptive strike against the Holy Lands. If/When it happens it will plume into a Mass "Jihad" with America and other free states tearing at the seems as the several religions clash. It would end-up Christianity Judism and Buddism etc. VS. Islam. Islam would indefinatly fall. CATHOLICS alone outpace Islam not to mention the 750 million Christians and Billion asian spawned religions (buddism, Hinduism etc.)

It would succesfully mark the beggining of REVELATIONS.

GOD SAVE HUMANITY
(again!)

No Iranian Terrorists????

Tell that to the PLF, IRA, ETA, PLFP, FARC, and a litany of other "freedom figthing" organizations that train at the Iranian government sponsor schools in Iran.

No Iranian terrorists... you guys are funny. Terrorism did not start on September 11, 2001. Check back through history. I would wager to say that more than fifty percent of those who commit terrorist attacks against the US or her allies, are either Iranian, or trained in Iran.

Where is it written that the US Government should promote peace?

I can tell you where it is written that it should provide for the common defense.

Dear Chris Purcell and Bob Owens and the like,
Are you a politician? If you are, you are no better than the president, and we all know how good he is! Do you guys have any idea about what Iran and Iranians stand for? Have you ever been to Iran? Have you ever interacted with an Iranian? Have you read history? Do you know the history of Iran? Do you have an insight into Persian culture? Do you believe in equality? Have you studied Islam or have any idea what it is? Do you know anything about the subjects I asked for? Is your only source of information the biased American news media? I suggest you try to answer my questions before analyzing Iranians, Iran’s plans and the future of the world. I believe that it is ignorant people like you who create all the problems. World would be in peace if you would keep your opinion to yourself. War is not necessary. Read history, read about Persian culture and try to educate yourself before coming out and trying to sound smart.

Dear C,
Try to answer my questions above but also, please give me the source of your information. How did you come to the conclusion that more than %50 of terrorism comes from Iran? Can you name an Iranian terrorist? I think you should back your allegation up otherwise no one would have respect for your words.

It becomes quite clear that this is a throroughly ignorant and unpoliticized country that actually gives voice and credence to people like George Bush. Neither the world's advice, reasoning, nor it's scorn makes the slightest difference to these pathological half wits. It appears some have now taken to running apocolytic scenarios in their heads with a thinly veiled glee, look at Owens...
Don't sleep walk in to a war with Iran. These people have lived as a civilization in that part of the world for a little over 5000 years longer than when we first started using weapons of mass destruction on the indegenous people of America. What do countries have to do to keep our lunatics out? Hang a no tresspassing sign?

Bob Owens:
"If western powers back down now, Iran will end your world, and your religion, and the only solace you will find is that you outlasted the Israelis by a breath."

Let’s not forget that the West and the former U.S.S.R were actively fermenting civil strife and toppling governments in Iran that did not acquiesce to their demands. We would not be in this predicament today if Western Powers had backed down from their meddling years ago. And to top it all off we have the West supporting every tin pot policy to come out of Israel. All of a sudden respect for human rights, justice, moderation and tolerance are conveniently forgotten because; hey it’s the Arabs on the receiving end. I am not saying the Arabs are blameless for the current situation, but the West with its blind support of an already dominant occupying force has exacerbated the mess. But even now it might be possible to salvage the situation if the West can force Israel to adopt a JUST and EQUITABLE demarcation with the Palestinians.

"The projected and all-but-promised Islamic first strike will clearly mark Islam as an aberration; a threat to all humanity."

I think you are getting a little carried away with the blame-Iran mantra. Remember that this MB is discussing the possibility of a U.S first strike against Iran. At this point it seems that any “nukilor” catastrophe is going to be caused by the current U.S administration. I do not blame Iran for trying to get Nuclear weapons (If indeed they are), considering that the sole superpower in the world has designated it as part of an ‘Axis of Evil’, and has retained the option of a nuclear first strike. Also consider the fact that one of the countries in that so called axis of evil (that just happened to be right next door) was recently invaded under false pretexts. If that’s too recent for you then we have U.S military and economic support for Saddam’s war with the Iran during which time he employed biological and chemical weapons against Iranian forces. In my opinion, all of this conjures up a pretty nightmarish scenario for Iran and leaves them with legitimate security concerns vis-à-vis the U.S and Israel. It would be a good idea to analyze the situation from their point of view before condemning anyone.

I think the Bush administration and its neo-con supporters need to get off their absolutist horse and analyze geopolitical situations in the light of the varied complexities of different cultures, needs and beliefs. Perhaps then the U.S will not go barging into conflicts with dreams of being showered with rose petals by the natives.

God forbid this turns into the nuclear Holocaust that Iranian president Ahmadinejad so dearly would love. The fact is, Iran has a leader who is straight out of the looney bin, and who has openly called for the destruction of another country. It is foolish and disingenous to pretend that civilized Western countries having nuclear weapons is no different than a loose-cannon maniac like Ahmadinejad having one. Yes, in a perfect world, nobody would have nuclear weapons, and nobody would fight one another, but we don't live in that kind of world. I have Iranian friends who absolutely abhor Ahmadinejad and the way he represents Iran on the world level. Iranians absolutely have a long history and a civilization to be proud of, but their Stone Age leader, and the barbaric Muslim clerics behind him, has cast a shadow and a blight on that history. One can make moral equivalence comparisons all day long about Bush and Ahmadinejad, but the fact remains that they are two very different people with very different ambitions. If the Iranian president decides to enter his country into a nuclear jihad, diplomacy just isn't going to cut it. At that point, it will be much broader than just US & Israel vs. Iran.

The best way to end talk of a war is to reinstate the draft. That is the only way the US would have the manpower to do anything. Of course, those who shout for war are those who will not have to make the sacrifces.

it's been common knowledge that the insane neocons in DC wanted to air bomb Iran since before Christmas 2005, but the insanity of wanting to use nuclear weapons to do so is yet another in a long list of indications that both Bush and Cheney have gone way over the deep end into WWII Hitler Bunker mentality.

Time to pull the plug on the red commie neocons in the White House, obviously.

A nuclear attack on Iran would be a disaster. This is obvious to any sensible human being and anyone holding an opinion to the contrary has no business expressing his or her opinion anywhere. There are issues that have only one side and this is one of them. So let me repeat, a nuclear attack on Iran would be a disaster.

However, we are dealing in this administration with a set of men of no conscience, no morality, no vision, and no competance, so will there be a nuclear attack on Iran? I fear the answer.

It has been acknowledged in many quarters that there is no way to stop Iran from having a nuclear weapon, eventually. Anyway, with the value of oil and natural gas going up (as the supply goes down), Iran almost HAS to have a weapon to keep its freedom. They are surrounded by nuclear powers: US (from several directions), India, Pakistan, China, Russia, Israel. (Owen, just for the heck of it, go look at a map.) China has a huge appetite for energy resources and Iran is right next door. In the meantime, if one wants an excuse to attack Iran (for its oil, for instance) then Ahmedinijan's remarks are great "evidence of intention". On the other hand, politicians are sometimes known to say something for effect. Like our own white protestant christian anglo-saxon-pure american president. I think Israelis who have lost family in the Holocaust are apt to be determined not to let something like that happen again, and so now in 2006 they are still (within their minds) fiercely re-fighting a battle against Nazis. While I am sympathetic, I have no interest in seeing the world go up in flames because of someone's misperceptions. Before someone recommends war against Iran at any cost, let's each of us study up on the issue as much as we possibly can, including trying to understand our own motives and issues. Bush is a serious threat to the world and I hope he achieves sanity and maturity before it is too late.

Mark, of course it would be a disaster. But I didn't say anything about launching a nuclear strike on Iran. You feel the way you do about the American administration, and you're entitled to that opinion. But what about Ahmadinejad? Is he a shining example of morals and leadership? I hear they hang homosexuals in Iran, by the way, among performing other heinous human rights violations. I ask you, what would your response be if you know Iran, whose president wants Israel wiped off the map, denies the Holocaust, and anxiously awaits the "end of days", has the bomb and has full intentions to use it? At that point, would you still sit idly by and do nothing? And before you put words in my mouth, I am not saying "nuke 'em all"! I am saying that, god forbid, Iran does exactly what we think it will do, shall we still sit by and twiddle our thumbs? I fear THAT answer. There is no logic or rationale in the mind of a fundamentalist robot like Ahmadinejad, and treating him as an equal player on the world level is foolhardy and stupid.

This will be a US proxy war through Israel. The US will fund the attack and then once a base in Iraq is secure and operational the US will support the ongoing aggression in Iran, if any. However, Rumsfeld and the Bushies will leave their western flank open to attacks from insurgent forces coming into Iraq. This action will force a commitment of Israeli forces coming into Iraq to quell the insurgency becasue of the stretched military capabilities of the US and the ineptness of this administration to fight a war. Then we will have complete instability in the region and put to rest decades of attempts to bring some kind of peace or stalemate in the region. All just in time for the mid-term elections. Deja Vu.

What price Israel? Why shouldn't Iran have nukes if the savage predatory Israel (five wars in it's short history--long stated plans to take over ancient lands belonging to Palestinians--the butcher Sharon's taunting on the Temple Mount which started again the recent fighting there,the bulldozing, the settlements... etc etc etc).Does anyone think 9/11 would've occurred without our
policy of support for Israel, whatever it does? We're told over and over by friend and foe alike all over the world that's the overriding problem in the mid east. For the terrorism we face. Britain, France and Germany hustled to start talks with Iran so the idiot Bush couldn't attack as he planned earlier ...Russia and China won't support even sanctions. Meantime Israel suckers the US into war with Iraq to begin tearing up the middle east. What, Iran and the rest of the Arab countries should be delighted? Again, what price Israel?

Savage, predatory Israel...riiight Methinks you're a bit upset that Israel is still there after so many wars. I guess that fact that it has been so successful in defending itself against savage, predatory, Arab attacks really bothers you. And Sharon taunting on the Temple Mount? But who started the violence? Are you implying that Palestinians are incapable of controlling their anger that they resorted to violence? Spare me the "poor Palestinian victim" talk. Neither side has been angelic, but it is the Palestinians who have walked away from peace deals. Face it, Israel is there, and will remain. Until the Palestinians can accept that and coexist, stifling the urge to strap a suicide belt on, then there will still be conflict.

People wonder what, if anything, will end mankind. Disease, a meteor, natural catastrophes, war? My friends, it is becoming clearer and clearer that it will be religion. The world will blow up like a giant suicide bomber for their own selfish reasons of living in paradise and lots of virgins.

I honestly don't see why the Iranian President is so confident. He has the American Military on both sides Iran in addition to a number of other powerful nations all pissed off at Iran. When they do develop their first nuclear bomb will that stop them from being attacked? No way. Anyone who says differently obviously hasn’t paid attention to history or current-events for the last century. And these people seriously have it coming. When you’re dealing with a nation of ignorant, illogical fundamentalists can you really afford to trust them? Nobody buys these claims that they have peaceful intentions – when has any nation from that region ever had peaceful intentions? All they understand is violence and pain – and their President’s cocky, self glorifying attitude is going to get a lot of them killed. There is an obvious peaceful way out of this, but the Iranians won’t accept that – they have chosen war by their unwillingness to cooperate with the International Community. Everyone paints the Americans out to be the bad guys for being the enforcers, but who else would do it?

I am all for a Nuclear Iran. Its good for the Middle East and can reign in the terror unlished by Israel. Now Israel will dare to even hit Iran or any middle east country because of the consequences.Our american foreign policy can not be run by the Israelies of Israeli Symphathisers .Israel is becoming a liability for us and we need to get tough on them too.

Protecting Israel, Part II
(The Israel lobby)

Both John Kerry and George Bush said during the televised Debates that The war in Iraq was at least somewhat justified by the fact that it kept Israel safe. Get a transcrpit and check it out. Apparently, all of Congress and every single major news agency must be perfectly happy with the 100s of billions spent and the thousands of lives lost protecting a country whose actions in the occupied territories have inspired the lions share of all middle eastern terrorism including 9/11 because to date, not one of them has questioned those remarks.

Now, in the Hersch's artice, Bush is said to justify a Nuclear Attack on Iran based on the fact that the president of Iran threatened Isreal and is the "New Hitler".

Apparently, all of congress and every single major news source in America is perfectly happy with this reasoning, in that no one has yet to question why in the hell we would risk a preemptive nuclear strike on a country that has not attacked another counrty in about 200 years, in order to protect protect israel.

Walt and Mearsheimers worst nightmare is coming true and just like the response that they received, anyone that says that they don't want to start WWIII in order to protect the Israeli Settler movement in the West Bank will be called an Anti-Semite.

I would also like to pose this question, If Pakistan is populated by people who resent Israel as much or more than Iran does, If it already has Nuclear Weapons, If in fact the man responsible for handing Nuclear technology off to both North Korea and Iran is sitting in Pakistan, lauded by the people there as a hero, untouchable, because to do so would cause the overthrow of the dictator keeping a lid on things, which would lead to a radical Islamic Government totally opposed to the U.S and Israel DOES IT NOT SEEM THAT BASED ON BUSH'S RATIONALE WE ARE BOMBING THE WRONG COUNRTY!!! Not that I condone bombing Pakistan, God forbid, but with friends like Pakistan, does Iran (who won't have nukes for about 10 years according to just about everyone except the Israelis) really seem like an immediate threat?

I have another suggestion.

Instead of Bombing Iraq, Why don't we send our forces into the West Bank, clear out all of the settlers, move them back over the green line (better known as Israel's real, internationally recognised borders) tear down the wall on any place that it spills over the green line and guard the borders to keep the Israelis OUT of Palestine until the Palestinians can form their own stable country.

Al qaeda would eventually go out of business for lack of recruits.

Iran Might still go nuclear, but since they have not attacked anyone in about 200 years and Israel would no longer be percieved as a literally growing threat, Who Cares?

The war on terror would eventually peter out completely due to lack of interest and we would save trillions and not have to fight a nuclear WWIII. Finally this is not appeasing "the Islamists", but rather doing something that is in line with stated U.S. policy for the last 40 Years. Not to put too fine a point on it, But the Settlements are Immoral. The Settelments are illegal. The settelments have cost the us (and Israel) more than just about any other foreign policy debacle in U.S. History and it's time to put an end to that Chapter once and for all regardless of what the Christian Right or AIpac have to say about it.

J

Ironic that this might come to a climax with the United States nuking a medieval country back into the stone age in an effort to keep things "peacefull". No doubt Iran will be peacefull once there are no more Persians alive to strap on bombs ... but is that really what we have in mind? Oh well ... I guess that's preferable to allowing a nuclear jihad. It just seems like eventually someone who had a little sense would step in and negotiate while there's still time. I mean, what was wrong with that Russian deal? Why must this country retain the enrichment process when it is un-needed to produce energy - unless they have some motives for doing so. How can anyone trust a nation that acts like this? One thing is for sure - there is a potential for a loss of human life on a scale that can only be described as biblical.

Sunburn Missle. Awesome weapon... except America does not have any :-)

P, Never again talk about Persians strap on bombs, you stupid, ignorant, uneducated Nazi. When in the history of the world did one Persian strap on bombs? Has there ever been any Persian suicide bomber? Name one; tell me where you got your information from. Your ignorance is a disgrace to this country and its people. Ignorant, misinformed and uneducated people like you are the reason behind all the problems.

by the way there was another P in here, that was me. You used my name.

Just think about it. Iran hasn't attacked another country in more than two decades. Iran even refused to use chemical bombs against Iraq despite of multiple use of it by Iraq against Iran. Iran has alot to loose if ever use any weapon of mass destruction in the region, and the question is to what to gain. President Bush has been planning to attack Iran for a long time. In his state if Union address four years ago, Mr. Bush called Iran axis of evil, and at that time there was no concern of nuclear Iran. Just think about it it is all about being a regional power. Neo-cons want a complete dominance on the region regarless of Iran's nuke program. If there was no nukes, neo-cons would've comeup with something else. It is disappointing that some poeple can't even think common sense. Iran is a rich country with tremendous potential for growth and prosperity, so its main iterest is peace and security for the region. Mr. Ahmadinejad's comment regarding Israel was a symbolic statement to get other muslims attnetion and support. American should open their eyes and see that Israel is becoming too much liability, and has too much influence on American foreign policy.

in more than 200 years not more than two decades

Thank God we Italians elected Prodi. Now our troops will be out of Iraq in no time. One more member gone from your bogus "coalition."
You're on your own, America. The world opposed you on Iraq, as did all but a few syccophantic national leaders who did so in the face of massive opposition from their own voters. Now, one by one, these leaders are being defeated at the polls.
An object lesson in how to lose a war, by George W. Bush.

For Starters, I urge all Americans to read the United Nations Charter on self defense of any soverign nation. It clearly states that all member states may procure and utilize all available means to defend its rightful terrority and interests. It does not state the US may supersede this charter and it does not exclude any WMD's from the list of self defense. I urge people to acquire broad global knowledge in the hopes of analysizing a situtation logically and not be duped again just because Iran happens to be located in the Middle East. N.Korea has confirmed to have the nukes and the long range missles to reach the US by our CIA and the N.koreans themselves but yet no military response from the US because the N.Korean missiles are unable to reach our ally Israel. Iran is just an excuse to deflect attention from our daily failures in Iraq and exposed lies by the civilians in this administration.

Also since when is having KNOWLEDGE on how to build a nuclear program, i say again mere KNOWLEDGE only, an act of war but yet that is precisely what President BUSH has laid down as a marker here in this debate. Read his speech yesterday at John Hopkins (10 april). How does one prove or disprove KNOWLEDGE of nuclear technology. Think about that, that is known as the trigger clause as its not possible to prove intent or knowledge conclusively as we know from conducting criminal trials everyday. If that is a real criteria then its reasonnable to say that anybody who visits a website on anything related to nukes from any nation should also be bombed into the stone ages.

In closing i ask this question to ponder, how many countries has the USA militarily ever attacked that possess nukes?. Hence.... Irans rush to acquire nuclear technology, NOT WEAPONS, nuclear technology for self defense just like we Americans believe its an inherent right of the govt to protect its citizens. I dare anybody to find a single reliable source attributable to the Iranian govt that they said they want nuclear weapons. W has said they want or have nuclear weapons, but remember the UN charter and never forget what he said about Iraq as well before 2003, our own USG has proved him wrong as did the UN, as did Saddam himself in feb 2003, as did Major Scott Ritter (USMC), as did General Zinni (USMC), as did Paul O'Neill (treasury Secretary), as did Colin Powell (Dept of State), as did Ambassador Wilson, General Shinskeki (COS Army), as did Richard Clarke (Nat Security Czar), are you getting the picture here folks. I urge you all to open your minds and arm yourself with knowledge before thats also outlawed as well here in our free USA. No wonder the iraqis are NOT buying our version of democracy, turns out life was better under Saddam for most Iraqi's, nor are the bahrainis, egyptians, Saudi's, palestians, etc. they've been around for a lot longer than 230+ years, they have culture and deep history to bolster their many accomplishments. May there be no more bloodshed on other nations soils.

trying to compare Iran's leadership with that of the US is a fool's mission. A bigger country with more resources is supposed to find adults to put at the helm. Instead we have the Bushies where Government is an echo chamber and all must parrot the great leader's non-sense. Guys with 1600 SATs don't go into that kind of situation anyway.
The US may suck up a 1/3rd of the world's oil, but it's population hardly qualifies it to start a lot of wars with the residue of the planet. There are unstanable economic consequences. The war that was to pay for itself with Iraqui oil is going to cost about a trillion US Dollars. Little misjudgement there folks.
Look up Pyric.

Iran's desire to have the bomb is, I think, mostly to protect itself from attack. Look at the example of North Korea, possibly the most insane country on Earth and totally safe from any attack, even airstrikes, because it has nukes. I don't think Iran is planning a pre-emptive attack on Israel when it does get nukes. The real fear, as with North Korea, is that nukes will be passed on or sold to terrorist groups who could smuggle it into a country and use it.

Bush and his government has made two critical errors in dealing with Iran. First they went after Iraq, which while it was a despotic evil regime did not pose any real threat to the West. While it was tied up there it gave North Korea and Iran enough time to start developing nukes.

Secondly the US has been unremittingly hostile to the Iranian government. It might have deserved it, but every time Bush branded the country part of the 'Axis of Evil' it crippled the moderates cause in Iran (and there are many moderates there).

Bush will launch airstrikes on Iran in the next year or so. He sees it a duty only he, as a second term president, can do.

Britain will not be able to take a front line position in that attack as Parliament and the country at large still feel we were lied to over Iraq's WMD.

Because of Iraq (where we will be mired for years to come) we cannot invade Iran. Airstrikes might hurt the Iranian people and government, but it won't topple it. The airstrikes might delay Iran's acquisition of the Bomb by a few years, but it will also strengthen it's power in the region.

What will happen after the airstrikes I don't know. Beyond totally destabilising Iraq and driving the Shia half of the country into a full alliance with Iran, I don't know what will happen next. But I doubt it'll be good for the entire region.

There were two comments here in this haze of ignorance that I thought should be mentioned.

". Look at the example of North Korea, possibly the most insane country on Earth and totally safe from any attack, even airstrikes, because it has nukes. "

NK is totally safe because it has a giant industrial and military power called China allied with it.

"would america dared nuke a nuclear Japan in 1945 ?"

ummm yes? We were sort of at war at the time.

Personally I find the entire "Nukes for defense" Argument ludicrous. Looking at the past 50 years or so the only thing nukes guarentee is that you have MORE nukes pointed at you.

I think all this blame on the US is a little misplaced as well. Sure Bush isn't the brightest bulb in the box but Iran has already turned down at least one deal already.

Brzezinski this morning warned that an attack on Iran, which would bog down the US for decades, would also cause the US to lose it's place in the world. It's standing, financially, morally and in every other way. He's right, though he may be too late. We already have. From it's strength when handed to the idiot Bush this country has now only armament superiority. Tourists don't even want to come, nor students.Thanks to greedy Israel and the dominance of it's agents at Defense, we've already lost our moral ground in war and torture. Heck, if this goes much further let the Mexicans have it.

Revelations is the ancient world's version of science fiction.

Cpt King,

Agreed. "The common defense."

By what logic does "defense" involve going abroad? Attacking first?

That sounds more like "offense."

DAN,What's my point? Read the 4/116:26 p postbyJ headed "Protescting Israel"..starting with the graph...I have another suggestion." Splendid idea that paragraph....

"When you’re dealing with a nation of ignorant, illogical fundamentalists can you really afford to trust them?"

Have you looked at our president and "ruling party" lately?!!

Who really has the "Messianc Vision" and desire the bring on "The End of Days" i.e Rapture etc. at the cost of the distruction of the world as we know it?Who really is delusional and crazy enough to feel that this is what his "God" has brought him into power to do?!!!!

God, this country really is filled with sniveling little girls these days ... shame

"God, this country really is filled with sniveling little girls these days ... shame"

I know, You disqust me.

I'm your typical war protester. I think this whole standing your ground against foreign threats thing is just rediculous. We should all just get in a daisy chain and smoke bud until our problems float away people. That would be SUPER! I don't think anything will come of this that we should be worried about. I mean, Iran is a sovereign nation totally on the same level as the U.S. - what's the difference between the two countries really. Iranian leadership is stable ... you know. They'd never do anything with a bomb anyway. In fact, lets just GIVE them some, yaaaaaaa. Let's just do like the Europeans - it's always worked for them. SUPER-DUPER.

GOOD TALK

Ok, keep your mind open to allow me to build the logical premise for this idea.

The Radical christian right believes that Israel plays a central role in the coming of the "End Times". The end times are variously described as occuring after christs second coming and that will coincide with the building of the temple in Jerusalem and a variety of other events. They believe that the we (America) must keep Israel in the hands of the israelis in order to hasten the building of the temple and coming of the end times.

The End Times Include the end of the world and of course the end of America (the destruction of America). The events that precede the end times will include great wars and tribulations.

Therefore, Our government is being led around by the nose politically by people who want to see and hasten the end of the world and logically the end of America. Led around by people who want to see the destruction of America.

These people believe that this is going to happen in our times and are excited by the prospect of a great war in the middle east because they see that as a sign of the End.
Finally, The Israel Lobby gladly accepts the help of these morons because it helps futher their aspirations to keep most of the west bank for themselves while also weakening their enemies.
AIpac and its supperters just laugh with delight at the ravings of these lunatics while we pay the price.

and I'm sure Jesus weeps at the prospect that people abuse his teachings in this way.

J

Bob Owens I’d like to respond to your comments about what I said on the 11th April 2006.

Firstly the war on Terror will only end when terror has ended. That is why I would like an ended the war on Terror. As for “The War on Terror” as named by the USA that is something of a political game. A true war on terror or terrorism would start by defining what terrorism is and apply the war equally where ever it exists. Not as the USA has done to block the UN request to define what terrorism is. In this way the USA decides what is Terrorism today and what it might be tomorrow to service its own political purpose. Hypocrisy continued.
Maybe you wish to war to continue indefinitely without any desire to see an end to terror? Do you understand the book 1984 by Aldus Huxley?

On a separate matter I agree that Iran is probably trying to get the “Ultimate Weapon” and the eradication of Israel. If Iran were to use it then there would be consequences for Iran, the death of millions etc. And threats like this have brought Pakistan and India to relative peace. As for whether this would destroy Islam I doubt as most Muslims do not live in the Middle East. And would I care if Islam was destroyed? Not particularly, neither wouldn’t care if Christianity was destroyed, for I am Agnostic. Despite the impression you may have got from my name I am not, nor have I ever been a Muslim. So my religion will not be destroyed, nor will my world as my world is not in the Middle East. If my name was John Doe you would not have jumped to such conclusions and accusations but looked at the facts.

The US will not launch a first strike against any other nation. American politics will not allow it. A middle eastern nation will one way or another launch an attack against either a regional enemy (Israel) Europe or The United States.
This will result in a nuclear retaliation from the aggrieved party or an ally. The resulting conflagration will eclipse WW2 like WW2 eclipsed WW1. Whichever side wins
will totally eliminate the threat of the other. Considering the nuclear weapon balance in the forseeable future, America, Europe, or Israel will prevail and only moderate Islamic regimes will survive. Since Islam spread through Europe and Asia it was only held in check by powers on the edges of the Islamic world. With great amounts of Oil wealth empowering aggressive regimes, those who want to try again and control the actions of other nations under the auspices of "avenging insults to Islam" are proven to be capable of any excess.
The next years will be critical and many Islamic powers may make the mistake of underestimating the Western worlds ability
to wreak havoc on and destroy its enemies.
If they think the rightious indignation of the Islamic people is formidable, wait and see the result of further outrages on Western peoples.

painball gun, painball, <a href="http://www.http://www.paintball-gun-gear-marker-a