Iran threat requires multilateral response

[Equinox]

Jim Hoagland, Chicago Tribune
08/15/2003

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/oped/chi-0308150113aug15,1,619594.story

WASHINGTON -- A grim warning from Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to President Bush, that Iran is much closer to producing nuclear weapons than U. S. intelligence believes, has triggered concern here that Israel is seriously considering a pre-emptive strike against Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactor.

Sharon dramatized his forecast by bringing Yoav Galant, a three-star army officer who serves as his military secretary, to a meeting with Bush in the Oval Office two weeks ago, U.S. and Israeli sources tell me. Galant showered a worried-looking Bush with photographs and charts from a thick dossier on Iran's program.

Now the analysis: Oy. And vey.


Article also found at:

http://www.nuclearpolicy.org/

[Zuni]

1. For some reason

the idea of apocalyptic religious fanatics having nukes in Iran doesn't sit well with me. Then again, Israeli likudniks and GWB aren't much better

[Equinox]

2. Agreed...

irresponsible people are irresponsible people regardless of race, religion, or creed.

:shrug:

[Darranar]

3. Agreed...

but you can't forget nationality in that statement.

[Resistance]

4. also agreed

but this isn't about right or wrong, responsible or irresponsible. It's about joint American/Israeli world domination plain and simple. The odd thing is that it's acceptable to question and criticize and even work against powerful American interests, yet nearly everyone looks the other way in the case of Israeli interests which are often the same or very similar. Makes you wonder where the loyalties really are does it not?

[Aidoneus]

5. those people fell out with Khomeini's death

What remains are self-interested bureaucratic parasites who like their positions and wouldn't do much to threaten themselves. If there even is a weapons program, which has not been proven aside from allegations from the usual sources (Israeli hawks and Likudniks in Washington DC "thinktanks"), I would assume it would be intended for defensive and deterrent purposes; the stunning example of Iraq/North Korea was not lost on the world.

[Equinox]

6. Yes..we set a nice precedent, eh?

If you have nukes, we won't bother you.


Very scary proposition now that all underdeveloped unstable countries are clammoring to get WMDs.

:scared: