I still very strongly believe that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.
So strongly that I believed it was OK -- perhaps, even necessary -- to soon take out their facilities by bombing those facilities (and ONLY the facilities). Of course, the USA or Israel the the only candidates to accomplish such a thing.
[Side Note: Such views have resulted in me being called a neocon asshole, and worse. I have suffered much anguish and emotional pain as a result.]
Anyway, I am in the process of reconsidering my neoconish ways. I believe the article below makes a very, very strong case to give Iran more time --- something I was previously vehemently opposed to doing, as I felt the past decade was plenty of time .. with zero results.
Honestly, I haven't made the leap yet. I need input from TBPers. Should I make the leap, or not?
============================================================================================
Don't bomb Iran's hopes for change
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
An attack would end any anti-regime resistance
Before we left for our winter holidays, it was possible to say certain clear things about Iran.
It was an authoritarian country, with a cleric at its head, but not a totalitarian country, like the former East Germany. Its protests were limited in scope and largely obsolete. Its revolutionary constitution had the respect of most people. Its nuclear program was not active.
In less than two weeks, everything has changed. But we must carefully discern which of the new realities matters.
The slaying of protesters on the holy day of Ashura, two days after Christmas, the seizing of their corpses before they could be buried, and the brutal crackdowns that have followed, have permanently changed the Iranian people's view of their President and the regime he represents.
The arrest and banning of opposition figures, the new use of spies, the much wider repression, have turned a populist-acting regime into something more like a total state.
Suddenly, in the eyes of mainstream Iranians, the regime has lost much of its theological credibility. As the reformer Mehdi Karroubi has said, even the still-hated Shah respected Ashura. These were not the acts of a "living God," as Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is meant to be seen.
And the escalating cycle of protests and repressions, very likely to reach a new plateau on the Jan. 16 anniversary of the 1979 revolution, has become something separate from the election unrest of last year.
"Before, people including me were trying to say that it's just a limited election dispute," says Ali Ansari, a respected historian of Iranian politics.
"The election no longer matters. ... This has been turned, by the government itself, into something more fundamental about the nature of government in the country."
This is not the Iran of 1979. It is thoroughly middle-class, with one of the east's highest university-education rates. There are 25.5 million registered Internet users in a country of 75 million; there are 50 million cellphone users. Iranians know very well what the alternatives are.
Still, there's unlikely to be a revolution this year, and even if there is, it won't be of the velvet variety. Any larger uprising could be very bloody: There are at least 90,000 members of the fanatical Basij volunteer militia, recently turned into a Stasi-like force by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Given the exciting and worrisome nature of such a seismic shift in the Middle East's most important country, it would be foolish to do anything that might damage the momentum.
Which, unfortunately, is what a number of people in the West would like to do. Not because of Iran's renewed potential for change, but because of something else that has happened these past few weeks.
Shortly before Christmas, for the first time, the International Atomic Energy Agency recognized "the possibility of military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program."
Iran, as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has to disclose any nuclear activities and allow inspections. In September, the world learned Iran was beginning to create an undisclosed enrichment facility in a tunnel beneath a mountain. That, plus Mr. Ahmadinejad's hostility and evasiveness, have made Iran's potential nuclear-weapons program a bigger worry than its authoritarianism.
But the nuclear issue is the one that can wait. The country currently has 8,000 centrifuges for making low-enriched uranium, of which only about 3,936 are being run, a number that has dropped by a thousand since last June: Iran is close to a making a weapon the way an owner of an iron mine is close to making an automobile. Their program is dropping away, probably because the protests have created other priorities.
Given this and other intelligence discoveries, the White House now believes it will be as long as three years before Iran is even capable of beginning the enrichment of its fuel into weapons-grade purity. Even then, under the most desirable of circumstances, even one weapon would take five or six additional years.
An attack on Iran would almost certainly accelerate the pace of the nuclear program, by allowing the regime to channel all its energies into militarization - exactly what the political crisis has prevented it from doing.
More importantly, an attack would end any anti-regime resistance.
Iran has come close to a major transformation several times: In the mid-1980s, and then at the beginning of the last decade. Those movements were only halted by outside forces: Saddam Hussein's attack and the war that followed; George W. Bush's "axis of evil," which brought Mr. Ahmadinejad to power. To throw a bunker-buster bomb in the middle of democratic change now would be a historically wasted opportunity.
96 Comments
mjs034
You need to look at it from a cost/benefits analysis. The consequences of a bombing will be unpredictable and possibly very unpleasant. That is ok if you are securing a vital national security objective. Is that the case here? The article certainly raises some doubts.
I think bombing, or any other military action should be an absolute last resort. After all, it is not like we are going to lose any military advantage by waiting.
Nof
I agree with mjs. If Iran does something stupid any number of countries are more than capable of turning the whole place into a cinder by themselves. How many years did it take us to go from Fat Man and Little Boy to producing missles with multiple MRVS that can hit individual ticks on your dog? (Substitute "fleas" if your dog has no ticks).
Alessandro
Without even reading the article, I am guessing it is about the huge youth movement in Iran that wants to be more westernized. If we attack them, we force the youth into aligning with the very entities we are in conflict with.
The problem is capitalism has too many ways to make money that can corrupt people. So the "crazy, militant" leaders don't just exist in Iran, they exist on Wall Street as well and the Wall Streeters feel it is ok to....
Hook others on credit card debt in emerging countries who in turn have credit card debt collectors who put our credit collectors to shame.
Hook others on cigarettes.
Hook others on porn.
Hook others on live entertainment / prostititution.
Hook others on corn syrup.
Hook others on fast food.
Hook others on fancy pants cars.
Hook others on gambling.
Hook others on divorce.
Hook others on the joys of taxation.
And that is why the "crazy, militant" leaders in Iran continue to exist, because our way is simply based on overconsumption that the entire world's population cannot match from an available resources point of view.
SanDiegoGuy
Excellent article, Stuck. And my sentiments exactly.
And I'd like to jump to your defense here and take exception to those misguided souls who've referred to you as a Neocon Asshole.
BALDERDASH!
You most certainly are NOT a neocon.
;o)
JimQ
Iran is completely surrounded by US troops. Our nuclear subs could obliterate their cities in minutes. The regime will collapse without our involvement. The regime wants us to attack or put sanctions in place. This would distract the people and give them a common enemy.
TLaCour
"Should I make the leap, or not?"
Jump little froggy, jump! The water is getting hot slowly... from cooling their nuclear reactors!
SenatorRusso
Iran has signed the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty. Israel has not. USAF Intel says Israel has roughly 400 thermonuclear weapons. US Intel says something along the lines of "they have the capacity or may in the future." Israel is committing war crimes left and right, the Mossad is implicit in all kinds of mayhem, and yet the focus is on Iran, LMAO!! What a fucking joke. Seriously.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU3nsg3t_HM
Obama, like Skull & Bones Bush before him, are simply AIPAC/LIKUD/ROTHSCHILD stooges. Pfffft
Israel was founded on Jewish terrorism. Study the "Stern Gang" or "Irgun." Study the "Lavon Affair." Study the "U.S.S. Liberty."
JennJohnson
They are doing a pretty good job of fighting amongst themselves at the moment. I think we should just let them concentrate on each other rather than us.
see http://ragingdebate.com/worldnews/the-west-should-stay-off-iranrsquos-road-to-revolution
Zara
Glad to see you're coming around, Stuck. I've been trying to get you guys to see it this way for months. Leave Iran alone and one day in the not-too-distant future there will be a new Iran. When that happens, I think you'll see the much of the diaspora return home.
SSS
Doesn't matter whether or not you leap, Stuck. Israel will act if it believes its national survival is threatened. An Iranian nuke will cross the threshold, and Iran has made plenty of threats to wipe Israel off the map in the past. We here in the U.S. may dismiss the threats as bombast, but Israel takes such remarks quite seriously. Israel will not ask "Mother, may I?" to the U.S. if it decides to act in whatever manner it feels appropriate. Social unrest in Iran doesn't mean a horse's patootey to Israeli policymakers, nor do rants and screeds like Russo's about Israeli war crimes.
While the article you posted is interesting, it is also a bunch of blather. Israel is the wild card in the deck, and it will remain so.
SenatorRusso
@SSS "Iran has made plenty of threats to wipe Israel off the map in the past. "
You have fallen prey to Zionist propaganda. What was actually said was "Zionist regime" not "Israel." Big difference.
Redneck
Have any of you nazis been to Israel? They have Arabs in the Knesset, Arabs can own guns, war crimes my ass they drop leaflets before they drop bombs. Better question have any of you nazis been to an Arab country? A bunch of you folks really either believe the MSM pali bs or hate Israel for a different reason. Israel is a miracle from 1948 to date, not some conspiracy a miracle that will be here until the world is over. Take that to the bank. And they will do whatever it takes to be there and rightfully so.
Redneck
BS Russo
ReverseEngineer
Why would Iran even need to build its own Nukes? If Israel dropped a Nuke on Iran, the Chinese would happily provide a few Nukes to Iran to pitch at Israel. The Chinese want Iranian Oil as much as anybody else. You really think they will let the Israelis Glaze Over the desert there in a thermonucler hailstorm without putting up a fight for it?
If they manage to build their own Nukes, so be it, the Cat has been out of the bag for a long while now, and Pakistanis and Indians have The Bomb, and you can't exactly say those places are all that stable these days either.
Basically, its time to bring all our Boys and Girls HOME here, before they get hung out to dry when the monetary system collapses. The Iranians? They are going to be very busy fighting each other. The Chinese? They will be very busy fighting each other. WE will be very busy fighting each other. Foreign Wars are just a drain on resources and our bankrupt Treasury anyhow.
If there is anyplace we need to clean house on Corruption and a Fascist State in the making, its right here at home. You gotta clean up your own house before you can clean up anybody else's house. Come ON! Do you really think our Goobermint is any better than the Mullahs these days? And we DO entrust them with Nukes. That is plain SCARY when you consider how well they handle financial crises these days.
RE
bob
China and Russia have a lot of money invested in Iran..oil, military hardware..Countries get pissed off when you mess with there investments....If we bomb Iran, the price of oil will cripple our depressed economy even more...
SenatorRusso
Albert Pike, 33rd Degree Mason ""The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."
Awareness is everything: http://www.threeworldwars.com/albert-pike2.htm
You're welcome.
Anonymous
Iran must be bombed. After them, we must take out Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea, the Phillipines, Malaysia,Thailand, Russia, Libya, and any of the other vermin countries making trouble. China can have some too if they choose. No more pussyfooting around. Let's take all the oil while we are at it as payment for guarding the pussy European nations since WWII. Let's hear the whining now from the bleeding heart libs.
drfrye
Stuck
I am with you on this. I think we need to just STOP. Let Isreal sleep in the bed they made. They may have advanced tech and abilities that surrounding countries don't but we now have a base in all strategic countries in the region.
If Isreal wants to start WWIII or IV then we have enough to finish it. We need to discuss with Russia and China to just stay out of it and let the middle east go once and for all. It is a tinder box and we need to remove all but essential personel from there and take the "wait, watch and see" attitude.
Let's focus here on getting rid of the charlatans in office and return to local thinking with a Global Scope. The world's problems are not necessarily our fault (I think it could still be on the shoulders of the Empire that the Sun Never Sets - i.e. England).
France is a good one to stir up trouble, let them take the reins. Greece and Italy are broke and only a good place to get Tiramisu, wine and pretty women. Germany, heck, just keep an eye on them too.
Take the leap. I had the knee-jerk response of bomb Iran, but now, wait. If they (Iran) do bomb Isreal, then annihlate them. If Isreal bombs Iran, then scold them as we always do. Just remember the middle east in general does not like western world, at least not the religious zealots that are in power there (and the 10% of those that are around the world ready to die for what, Virgins, Virginians, what are they willing to die for? If only Darwin could be here to explain their behavior).
Wait, Watch and See. Do nothing, and build bridges everywhere else.
Good-luck
SSS
Russo said in a thread above, "@SSS: I think it is the duty of every responsible U.S. citizen to put all their energy into having the U.S. government cut all military, economic, and political ties with Israel. They are a parasite nation." Not gonna happen, Russo.
San Diego said in the same thread: "Which is a damned good reason to believe that those bastards (meaning the Israelis) are not such a splendid ally of ours. They don't give a hoot in hell what their attack on Iran would mean to our economy. Not to mention the possibility of attacks carried out on our soil by the Iranians in retribution for an Israeli attack on Iran. Our affiliation with Israel is/has/always will be pure poison." Let me add a comment, San Diego. The Israelis won't give a hoot in hell what their attack on Iran would mean to THEIR economy or attacks carried out on THEIR soil.
I gave everyone on this discussion post a generous dose of reality on the Iran conundrum. Israel will call the shots if Iran gets close to the nuclear weapons club, or enters it. Your arguments are meaningless to the Israelis. Do you two have a problem with the concept of NATIONAL SURVIVAL?
Skyprince
How refreshing it would be to allow a country like Iran to solve their problems from within. And Jim is right...an attack on Iran simply plays right into their plan and further solidifies the "anti-American" fervor in the entire region. What if we were to surprise them and take a less aggressive stance? Seems to me it would embolden the resistance from within and really anger the leadership. To stay in power, they must rally their people around a common enemy as in 1979. Let's not make that too easy for them.
dholsop
The ayatollah khomeini told the Iranians to have huge families...and so they did. Now there are a lot more young people than old people who do not see a future in Islamic government. Even the old folks are seeing all the broken promises and failures of the Islamic government.
There is actually a surge of Christianity going through the country. You won't here this from MSM. This REALLY has the Islamic leaders worried. (All Islamic governments worry about this...because Islam is so screwed up...hence all the blasphemy laws etc)
Bombing anywhere in Iran would be a huge mistake. I would just place control more solidly into the hands of the Islamic leaders via the Nationalistic response.
This is an exciting time for Iran. We need a way to support the movement without giving the regime an excuse to divert attention from the mess they are in. We are in a "race condition". Can the country turn the corner on Islam before the Islamic leaders get nuclear arms?
StuckInNJ
I have made my decision. I am taking The Leap! We should NOT bomb Iran.
JimQ makes the strongest argument; that by bombing Iran we are playing right into the hands of the mullahs. This would be Iran's Black Flag operation. No one countered this argument. It is a strong one.
Zara, our resident expert on Persian affairs, also make a very good point I hadn't considered before. She talks of a new Iran when the Diaspora returns home. There are millions of Iranians living abroad ... I presume almost all have been "Westernized" ... at least in terms of rejecting fanatical jihadist belief systems. A return in significant numbers could have a huge impact ... indeed, a new Iran! My personal feelings are that it won't actually happen. My own parents longed to go back to Austria for a few years ... but after about 10 years that feeling pretty much vanished. People become accustomed to their new way of life, and going back to the "old country" is just a faded dream. Perhaps ex-pat Iranians will be different.
I am surprised no one commented (pro or con) on this statement from the article; " Iran is close to a making a weapon the way an owner of an iron mine is close to making an automobile. ... even one weapon would take five or six additional years." This comment more than any other is swaying me away from staying a neocon bastard. I have been led to believe that the Iranians can make a bomb within a year. This is the generally accepted timeframe from most of the MSM. This is the first time, to my recollection, that puts the timetable out another five years. Now, just because this article says so, doesn't mean that's the case!! More verification is needed. I'm somewhat disappointed TBPers just skipped over it. Researching Iran's timeline for actually manufacturing a nuke will be on my "to-do" list. Of course, the huge problem will be getting independent nonbiased information. Anybody know where to start?
To all the people who brought Israel into the discussion. The article mentions nothing about Israel. Try to stay on point. Of course, I DID put Israel in the Title. My bad. My mistake. I wish I did not do that. The anti-Zionist rants distract from meaningful conversation, are tiring, and result in flaming hatred faster than Bill Clinton can unzip his zipper.
SenatorRusso, you are particularly guilty of this. Your virulent hatred for Israel is apparent to all. Congrats for finding a platform to evangelize your hatred. But I call bullshit. You're not even 30 years old and yet you have all this world traveling experience. Horse manure. Israel should never be above criticism and deserves it when appropriate, but your unabashed hatred is so one sided and unbalanced you sound like a raging skinhead ... really.
Are there any ex-neocon meetings I can go to ... like the AA meetings? "Hello, my name is Stucky and I'm a neocon. I haven't had a neocon thought in 5 minutes."
Salty
Question: "Honestly, I haven't made the leap yet. I need input from TBPers. Should I make the leap, or not?"
Answer: You (and the US) should mind your own business, which does not include attacking a country which has done nothing to us.
SSS
Stucky said, "I am surprised no one commented (pro or con) on this statement from the article, 'Iran is close to a making a weapon the way an owner of an iron mine is close to making an automobile. ... even one weapon would take five or six additional years'.....I'm somewhat disappointed TBPers just skipped over it."
Actually, I'm glad TBPers skipped over the statement. Iran's nuclear program is total guesswork, just as Saddam's WMD program was (look where that got us). The CIA and Mossad may have a better viewpoint than what's out there in the public domain, but maybe not. My guess is that the best intelligence is held by Mossad, and they're not talking to anyone but the leaders of Israel and the IDF.
So why should TBPers take a shot at the unknowable, just because some reporter came up with a clever assertion that's unproveable?
IraK
I see that once again Jim Quinn and StuckInNJ agree with me. We should NOT bomb Iran. The likely explosive consequences would be dangerous or disasterous. Squeeze Iran I say, slow like a snake kills its prey. Sanctions, assassinations, supporting Iranian dissidents, and some terrorism will destabilize the country. We can make war on them that way and they can't retaliate against us. Any attack on Israel or the United States' forces would lead to a devastating response by us. We hold all the cards and right now President Obama is playing them right.
BigDog
It isn't a question of "should we bomb"? We need to see an Iranian bomb as a true and very serious threat. The West should unite in opposition. At some point an attack has to be one of the options on the table. Everybody is waiting to see how the unrest unfolds. Don't think for a second the same regime that will crack heads to hold onto power, will stop in its ambition for a nuclear warhead. A bomb is simply not something the Israelis nor the US should allow.
Anonymous
we have to stop them in their countries! this will allow more time for our govt and wallstreet to figure out more ways to get us to go along with their destruction of the united states of ponzi.
Anonymous
lets bomb them. then everything will be peachy keen in america.
Anonymous
what the fuck difference does it make of whether to bomb iran or not. wont happen anyway, till the shit in wash dc and new york get thru stealing and re-stealing the last goddamn fiat dollar. be glad when that shits worthless so there wont be anything left to conive and lie over except the marketing value of the stink in shit, which im sure isreal will be a big player in.
Tom Frank
But, but the Pentagon inventory of bombs are overflowing every one of the 12,847 warehouses around the world. New productions keep coming in. A couple of dozen generals are waiting for their long-overdue new stars. They don't get them sitting on their asses. What to do? The Pentagon has to bomb somebody. It has been 7 long years since there were some serious bombing. This is getting unbearable!