Neville Chamberlain was a far-sighted hero compared to this

David

Jaw jaw is better than war war - Winston Churchill

Jonathan Karmi

This is a case where the wise men of six world powers, are all, without exception, wrong. Russia and China are evil regimes and don't particularly care about the consequences. The others have no excuse. This stupidity is a symptom of our dumbed-down, culturally relativist times, where people just can't think straight. Iran should not be allowed anywhere near getting nuclear weapons. The West has failed already and we'll pay for it big time.

Suki

Obama is now effectively withdrawing and offering up Israel's throat.

Israel cannot win with the Western mainstream media. If it tries to stop Iran, it will be held up as the fall guy. If it does nothing - it will be reduced to rubble.

Obama is precipitating an endgame of some sort in the Middle East that will play out likely within this term of office.

Unwittingly he also seems to be engineering an endgame of sorts in America. Witness the protests in DC over the weekend (unreported for the most part in Europe). Obama has every chance of starting another civil war in America, which is why he is so keen to disarm the population.

People will only take so much of this.

Carlos Perera

What surprises me is that so many people should be surprised that Mr. Obama is willing to enable the obvious temporizing by the Iranians, while they hasten to put the finishing touches on their nuclear weapons program. Mr. Obama's own (pre-Presidential campaign) autobiography, _Dreams from My Father_, portrays a mind obsessed with his country's failings--especially its racial sins--and blind to its many virtues and glories. This is also the point of view of those who have helped form his political consciousness: Frank Marshall Davis, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and others of their ilk.

I met and debated many people like Mr. Obama when I was in college in the early 1970s. To them, the U. S. and its allies have always been in the wrong (excepting, maybe, a few instances like our alliance with Stalin in World War II). In their world view, it is a _good_ thing for the Iranian mullocracy to have nuclear weapons, and a _bad_ thing for Israel to have them.

When the mushroom cloud rises above the embers of what was Tel Aviv, Mr. Obama and his ideological kin will, no doubt, shed many a crocodile tear in public, hypocritically bemoaning (in the passive voice) that such a "tragedy" should have happened . . . but will then proceed to blame the sins of the West for having brought the whole thing about in the first place. Who knows, maybe Bush and Chaney will be tried as war criminals for provoking the Iranians to such extreme behavior!

As I've said elsewhere, anyone holding Israeli assets should sell short. (Nor would I recommend that anyone buy real estate in major American coastal cities.)

God, I hope I'm wrong!

daniel maris

Israel has the perfect right in international law to obliterate Iran's nuclear capability. Iran has made clear its determination to exterminate a legitimate UN member state - Israel. It talks the language of genocide.

Iran is a despicable state that uses rape of male and female prisoners, with official backing, as a deliberate instrument of state policy, designed to terrify a cowed population into submission. It falsifies election results. It sponsors terrorism.

The idea that you would sit down and talk things through with people like that is ridiculous.

The way forward I believe is to blockade Iran and launch an air war, isolating all its nuclear facilities.

David - Jaw-jaw is better than war-war? It depends on the circumstances. This is a fanatical regime that is bent on Israel's destruction, the USA's destruction, and the destruction of all non-Muslim states.

We should be actively undermining the regime in all ways possible.

Bob from Virginia

I just completed some relevant chapters in Amir Taheri's The Persian Night, an outstanding expose of the Islamo-fascist regime. One of Taheri's tenets is that the regime is incapable of sincere negotiation or compromise, because that would represent an imperfection in their ideology. They do see dissemination as a legitimate means to achieving their ends, which, believe or not, includes world domination (gee, where have we heard that before).
It should surprise no one that Obama has taken the route he has. In fact this is exactly what he promised and what fellow Democratic Party opponents roundly criticized as naive.
Obama's performance to date has been truly amazing. I can recall no US president who has ever done so much contrary to normal commonsense in such a short period of time.

Bogdan of Australia

David, pula-pula is stil better than jaw jaw...

Jerry

Mr. Obama does not want America to win at anything in which it engages. Not politics, not war, not economics, not innovation, not freedom.

Why? Penance for previous sins, weakness to prevent future engagement, ultimate rejection of the principles of republican democracy and Judeo-Christian values including property rights and the devaluation of individual worth when measured against the interests of the state.

The most important value that Mr. Obama degrades is simple truth, which holds no particular worth when an ideological goal is thwarted by the inconvenience of facts. Case-in-point: an undefined health bill that needed to be passed without regard to its contents and its effects. The goal: to increase the American deficit and thus strip it of the ability to act in the world as an independent force.

porkbelly

Do not underestimate the role Obama's ego - the immensity of which we are only now beginning to grasp - plays in this.

Terry, Eilat - Israel

This is how WWII started - appeasement & throw Czechoslovakia under the bus.
Today, we see the same process with Iran, appeasement & throw Israel under the bus.
This is a guarantee for a nuclear war in the Middle-East.

Jonathan

From where I write in Tel Aviv, you can almost hear the whimper.

Larry

this post is gonna seem kinda strange and even woowoo (and also depressing for that matter). It relates to the tragic F-16 crash and death of IAF pilot Assaf Ramon, the son of famed pilot and astronaut Ilan Ramon who died in the Columbia Shuttle crash in 2003. My perhaps 'wacky' point is - is Ramon's tragic crash and death, whose name is iconic in Israel with the IAF, arguably more so re the IAF than any other given who his father was, a bad omen for the probably inevitable IAF strike on Iran?

If you are the kind of person who believes in omens as I do, it is worrisome. If not, and most of you probably don't believe in that kind of thing regarding it as an unscientific superstition, well you will understandably just shrug it off and dismiss it. And I really
hope that in this case you are right.

The thing is with historical hindsight one can see numerous tragic events in history as bad omens - the sinking of the Titanic two years before WW1 was symbolic of the coming collapse and sinking of the British and European Empires, ruined by the Great War. The crash of the German Hindenburg airship in New Jersey two years before WW2 began was to be symbolic of the coming flames that would destroy the Nazi Empire. The Chernobyl nuclear meltdown in '86 was a symbolic omen for the coming collapse of the Soviet Union a few years later and the Columbia shuttle disaster of 2003 was a bad omen for the troublesome war in Iraq occasioned by the US-led invasion that same year.

Also of course Assaf's father Ilan Ramon died in that crash, he was of course famed for the strike on Iraq's nuclear reactors in '81. Was his own death an omen for the Israel-US rift that has intensified under the anti-Semitic Obama administration, and Israel's own decline in confidence and self-belief? Maybe that's stretching things a bit, but if there are such things as bad or good omens, then what other form could a bad omen for an Iran strike take other than the crash of an Israeli fighter jet and the death of the pilot whose name is THE icon and symbol of IAF derring-do and achievement, more so than any other in the Israeli public mind?

I hope I am wrong, I am a staunch Zionist and Israeli and I live in Tel Aviv. I just mention this, because nobody else has (anywhere as far as I know), and unfortunately I do believe in omens...

Trumpeldor

Melanie,

One forthcoming day,our F15s and F16s will do the job that USAF should have done in a "normal"world
At the same time,we look forward to that fateful day and we dread it because,we know that the fallouts will be huge,in each sense of the word
Obama is a traitor to western values,in the same league as Chamberlain
Liberal Jews,by voting in droves for that new messiah,will be responsible for the incoming war
By supporting abortion,homosexuality and superficial values over Thorah ,they will only bring mayhem to the USA and the whole Middle East

Stephen Rothbart

If all this is true, then we can be sure Israel will have to go after Iran and very soon.

Israel has always pre-empted its enemies when they feel that war is imminent.

By his abdication of responsibilities towards their allies, and I don't just mean Israel, Obama has almost guaranteed another tragic Middle East War.

Who will win it, we shall have to see. It depends whether the Saudis and Egyptians stay out or take sides with their nemesis, Iran.

Either way, a really bad call again from Obama, and let's not forget, his famous SoS, Hillary Rodham Clinton, the pro-Israeli hawk, that all my Democrat friends in the US insisted would provide the 'balls' that Obama clearly lacks.

She turned out to be a busted flush too.

Victor.

And Europe ? Everyone focuses on Obama, to me the States is a busted flush and if one believes the rumours of an imminent 9/11 strike on Germany during their upcoming elections , please remember one thing, Germany is not Spain and Iran and its proxies will pay a terible price if they provoke the German nation.

Not sure yet if this will be good for Israel but time will tell.

Thank you Melanie Philips for your brilliant analysis of events to date .

Terry from Oz

I agree with iran on one thing. I'd also get rid of the big power veto at the security council of the un.

I'd do it by winding up the un holas bolas and sending its trough snouters home. I'm sure the building in Manhatten could be put to some more useful purpose. In fact, leaving it empty as a museum to its folly would be more useful than its present purpose.

JamesC

Thanks Melanie for keeping us informed. You're a gem.

Adonis

Soil requires blood, sacrificial blood that is, and politicians, usually those of the stripe that believe they are doing the best for the most people, along with some half-baked utopianist ideals, are quite to supply blood by the bucket. However, it is doubtful whether there will be sufficient buckets this time to scoop up effectively the atomised blood of the victims, and therefore this particular sacrificial caper will be in vain.

God help us from politicians with smart ideas.

macumazan

It's already too late. The very possibility that Iran has nukes will rule out any IAF strike on it. Rather as North Korea is nmow invulnerable (because a nuke on Seoul - or Los Angeles - outweighs any benefit from incinerating North Korea) so the mere possibility of an Iranian nuke on Tel Aviv rules out any pre-emptive strike. A policy of mutually assured destruction saved the world in the heyday of communism. Whether it will work in the middle-east is not a moot point, because that is what we now have. One can only wish that Iranian ideological worship of martyrdom is just ideology and the mullahs are hard-headed devotees of Realpolitik. But perhaps they're not. It's too late, anyway, just as it is with North Korea.

david Smith

I just wonder how Japan, dependent on ME oil, will view any attempt by Iran to shut off the oil in the event of war.
Japan has a formidable Navy,far bigger than ours, and as an old style nation state will act in it's own interests.
Unless the Iranian leadership is completely insane Iran ( with it's useless allies) could find itself isolated and in deep trouble on more than one front. And what on earth makes anyone think the Russians are about to ally with Iran? Their army is much closer now to the Iranian north now.
Iran is in a much weaker position than many think.

Augustus

One wonders whether Obama and his administration really understands the political setup in Iran. When Ayatollah Khomeini came to power he set about expanding the powers of the Revolutionary Guard in order to prevent Revolutionary regime reform. Over the years the Guard's power has grown to such an extent that they are now more powerful than the Mullahs, who also depend on them for security. Iran's recent election fraud, it's most blatant so far, could have been a calculated move by the Revolutionary Guard. For years the Guard has been accumulating power under the pretext of preventing a 'velvet' revolution', i.e. a Western backed takeover by democratic forces. The transparency of the latest fraud is what incited the democratic forces into mass demonstrations.

America and the West should certainly treat Iran as a major threat. The best policy would be to forge an international consensus against the current regime. One of the greatest dangers would be Iran playing the major world powers against each other. In theory, Iran could become a democracy of sorts, this is what the protesters want. But a far more likely outcome is that it will transform into a military dictatorship.

Joshua

And, most terrible of ironies, is the simple truth that if millions of Jews in Israel are murdered by Iran, it will be their Jewish brothers and sisters in the U.S. who will in large part be responsible. I am not simply talking about the 80% of Jews who voted for Obama but also the Jewish money and Jewish political influence that got him elected. They bring nothing but shame upon the Jewish people.

John Thomas

I can't give the context of Churchill's "Jaw jaw / war war", and neither does David, who quotes it - but my guess is that WSC believed that that approach was right in some cirumstances, and war (defence of Western democracy, etc. - which he certainly believed in) in others. My guess is that WSC took a Book of Ecclesiastes-like line - there is time for jaw, and a time for defensive war; and this is the latter.

winston smith

So we gotta bomb the Persians cause they are are a threat ?
When is the last time Iran attacked anyone ?
1738 is the answer you dumb warmongering parasites.
In 1738, Nader Shah successfully drove out the Afghan rebels from Isfahan and established the Afsharid Dynasty. He then staged an incursion into India in 1738.

So , a country that hasn't invaded anyone in 271 years is a "threat" - so we gotta bomb them right ?

Well, they do have lots of oil I suppose, so why not murder hundreds of thousands of innocent people so that 'our' oil corporations, banks and defence manufacturers benefit.

On the other hand, stop and THINK for a minute about what your evil machinations mean to those who are going to be bombed. Make a choice in life - either wake up to humanity or carry on as a dumb sheep being led into disastrous wars that benefit the few who hold the reigns of power at the terrible expense of lives shattered and destroyed.
We are one humanity -it's time you woke up from your invisible prison and start to think for yourselves and not be brainwashed into organised mass murder of innocent people.

Steve

But David, when the war war comes to your door door the jaw jaw time is no more more.

Joshua

The world is full of winston smiths, willing, even eager, to stand aside as millions of Jews are murdered. As it was during the Holocaust so it is today. That is why Israel should and must act alone if necessary to protect the lives of her Jewish citizens. And if there are serious consequences for the rest of the world, then that world has only itself to blame. We are not going to present you with another Holocaust for you to cry crocodile tears over.

MikeF

Best to leave Neville Chamberlain out of discussions about affairs like this because of all the politicians of the 20th century he is the one who tends to get re-invented to suit purely contemporary concerns. Personally I tend to the view that he honestly thought that Hitler was exploiting genuine German grievances over the Versailles Treaty and that by seeking to amend the Versailles settlement he would cut the ground from under Hitler's feet. It was not to be but hindsight is a wonderful thing and Chamberlain was not the dupe he is often presented as being.

daniel maris

Winston Smith -

Persia as you call it, has attacked Lebanon, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Argentina amongst others by use of proxies. She actively calls for the destruction of fellow UN member states. That is enough in my mind to make it a legitimate target.

Trumpeldor

From winston smith,the clever and the cunning
"So we gotta bomb the Persians cause they are are a threat ?"

Yes,because this kind of threat only strikes once.....
Rejoice,dear mr smith
Such even would rid the world of Jews and 'palestinians'at the same time !

PW Virginia USA

Winston Smith...you refuse to allow that states today use surrogate fighters, supplying them with weapons and cover...Think about the Argentina bombings and the Hezbolla war as an example of Persian aggression...

Groovy Times

Winston, you've made a serious bid for the moral high ground with that outburst, but can I suggest that history teaches us that those who wage war on the Jews tend to be the real enemies of humanity.

I would suggest that Iran's current regime has made it very clear how it views the Jewish State, yes that same 'peace-loving' regime that lost a million lives fighting it's Muslim brothers from Iraq.

The regime of the Mullah's was born in slaughter and oppression, and to claim that with it's current ideology, its drive for a nuclear capability, and its track record with its neighbours that it poses no existential threat to Israel is naive, delusional or just plain wicked.

Charlie

“So we gotta bomb the Persians cause they are are a threat?”

No-one is talking about “bombing” just for the sake of it. Let’s be clear here, the Israelis are worried about an anti-semitic, holocaust denying regime (that in case we forget, also funds/aids other terrorist, anti-semitic, holocaust denying, “elders of zion” believing proxies in close proximity to Israel) getting its hands on nuclear weaponry, and so they want to remove their nuclear sites. We’re not talking about the bombing of Iranians in general. No-one would want that. Instead we are talking about taking out their nuclear zones or disarming them.

“On the other hand, stop and THINK for a minute about what your evil machinations mean to those who are going to be bombed. Make a choice in life - either wake up to humanity or carry on as a dumb sheep being led into disastrous wars that benefit the few who hold the reigns of power at the terrible expense of lives shattered and destroyed.”

Dumb sheep? Well sadly, your knee jerk, nowadays identikit BLACK and WHITE school of left wing thinking veers closer to herd like behavior than anything else.

“We are one humanity -it's time you woke up from your invisible prison and start to think for yourselves and not be brainwashed into organized mass murder of innocent people.”

Indeed “we are one humanity”, but does the Ahmadinejad regime think that? Don’t even think about answering that in the affirmative.

john Norman

One thing guaranteed to perk up European and American ears will be to send POTUS Obama and Figleaf Baroso and company a message from Israel that one strike on Israel will bring about the complete destruction of key European cities from Berlin to Belem and Vilnius to Verona. Why us, they will cry despairingly? Why the Jews? And why not Europe? They're willing to sacrifice Israel. Well, Europe must not and will not be allowed to survive Iran's genocidal act. Europe must pay. Europe down, the world will find it hard to know how it's going to build a rational and viable economic and cultural block. Europe doesn't deserve to survive.

Drakken

Winston Smith
You may take that high moral ground till they bury you in it. You folks over in Europe are on the verge of a civil war yourself. So where are you going to stand? To allow and appease the mad mullahs is tandimount to surrender. Appeasement in the face of aggression is cowerdice.

Archie

Augustus: the one big problem to forming an "international consensus" is the seeming rush to talk to the Mullahs or their mouthpieces by the biggest player in any potential consensus, i.e. the USA!

Dixon

When they finally acknowledge that hydrocarbon dependence is here to stay and the "renewables" utopia an unobtainable fantasy, then American leaders of all stripes will be forced to recognise that a nuclear Iran will be a direct and immediate threat to the oxygen of their society...Saudi oil.

They will have no option but to react accordingly.

Herbert Thornton

The situation gets murkier and murkier.

North Korea appears to have already manufactured nuclear bombs (of a sort) and Iran is well on the way to doing so.

Macumazan says, I think correctly, that it is already too late.

But we need to put our minds to this - "too late" means too late for what?"

Judging by what we have seen so far, the big problem will be that neither Iran nor North Korea will actually use them but will instead make them available secretly - whether gratis or on the black market doesn't matter - to shadowy groups who WILL use them.

So after a nuclear bomb has been detonated in Tel Aviv, or Chicago or Liverpool - how will it be possible to know who was the manufacturer and what group or government actually used it? And after half a dozen more such detonations, what then?

Doubtless there would be dancing in the streets in a good many places, but how could retaliating indiscriminately against them solve the problem?

St Bruno

I can’t really say I understand what a country like Iran needs an atomic weapon programme for. I can’t think for a moment why their brand of the religion of peace should tell the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran to commit the biggest and final suicide bombing the world has ever known.
How long do we in the west (and Israel) have to put up with this type of childish behaviour? Maybe it’s our entire fault for not doing what we are told. I just hope the present President of the United States of America comes to his senses and tells it to them man-to-man, Muslim-to-Muslim to behave themselves if they want to be taken seriously or I’ll tell my Saudi friends to sort you out as we did with Iraq, you wouldn’t want that to happen would you.

daniel maris

Herbert Thornton -

That's really the point with Iran (and NK, but probably less so).

Use of surrogates makes them particularly dangerous. Indeed for all we know NK might well have provided Iran with a nuclear bomb already.

I think it is possible probably to determine the origin of a nuclear bomb, but it would probably take a long time. If a bomb went off in New York - who could say at first where it originated from? It might be Iran. But it might be North Korea. Or Al Queda. Or someone else. It might take many days, possibly weeks before analysis could determine its origin. By which time the conspiracy theorists and the peace lobby will make retaliation quite difficult. A cold blooded retaliation against Tehran? When Iran is denying all knowledge of the bomb? When it is parading women and children in the streets pleading for the world to save them from the USA?

Imagine the horrific media storm.

No, we have to stop Iran now. Before it is too late. We know the regime is actually quite weak. Few Iranians really believe in it any more, even if they support it through fear or self-interest. Let press for regime change and apply real pressure: blockade and military action to isolate the nuclear facilities - preventing any transport to and from such facilities and disrupting all
energy supplies to such facilities.

Michael of Charlotte

A sad day and a new low in American politics. When those of us said he would sell Israel down the river, we were called racists and fear mongers.

I wonder what we will be called after it is gone?

Finzi Holst

To those, who think one can enter into dialogue with Islamists,

One word: Al-Takeyya is a policy whereby a Muslim may lie, deceive or omit critical truths if it promotes the spreading of Islam AND the conquest of the non-Muslim world. According to William P. Welty, Ph.D., al-Takeyya/Taqiyya is:

"The Islamic principle of lying for the sake of Allah. Falsehoods told to prevent denigration of Islam, to protect oneself, or to promote the cause of Islam are sanctioned by the Qur'an, including lying under penalty of perjury in testimony before the United States Congress, lying or making distorted statements to the media such as claiming that Islam is a religion of peace and deceiving fellow Muslims when the one lying has deemed them to be apostates." (1)

One believes Islamists at one's peril.

"The lapdogs diguised themselves as sheep and tried to hunt with the wolves." -- Dag Hammarskjold

What did they/do they seek: "to fight against the people until they testify that none is right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammed is the Messenger of Allah." (Bukhari, vol. 1, book 2, no. 25) The same statement is repeated in vol.1, book 8; vol. 4, book 56; vol. 9, book 88; vol. 9, book 96; and in other hadith collections.

The jihad, begun by Muhammed, continues to this day. It has never been dropped or repudiated by any Muslim leader or sect. It has grown with perceived Muslim strength and ebbed with Muslim weakness. But it has never stopped.

Nor did the invasion of Iraq fire it up again. Nor is it about oil. When it started, oil was not an issue. The addle-headed are welcome to believe it.

Prominent American Muslim spokesman Siraj Wahaj: "if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its consitutional government with a caliphate." -- (Kashmir Telegraph, May 2002)

Obama is no friend of Israel; he is no friend of the US; and he is no friend of the West.

But Winston Smith, the wolves are indeed howling; they are howling for you. And I assure you, they make no distinction between us.

Stephen Rothbart

Winton, the leaders in Iran are like some evangelicals, the Iranian Shiites are escatologists. They are eager to bring on the end of the world because that will bring the 1,141 year old 12th Imam out of hiding according to their beliefs, ushering in seven years of a messanaic age.

You are not dealing with rational people.

Centuries ago, people all over Europe chose to burn at the stake rather than take the Catholic or Protestant point of view of their religious leaders. The leaders of Iran are religious bigots, who believe they have a destiny to fuilfill,are no better than them. If Christianity can have held such strong beliefs only 400 years ago, why would anyone not believe that this form of Islam, stuck in a 1,400 year old time warp could not too?

Obama is not dealing with a political movement, he is dealing with people with whom he has no understanding. As a man from Chicago, he got where he got by 'doing deals' with people that he may not have liked, but were necessary to get on.

With Iran, there IS no getting on.

Israelis understand that, because they are from the Middle East, and have some loonies of their own. Fortunately, the loonies are not running the country. In Iran they are.

Totally irrational people cannot be deterred. Only the application of superior force can restrain them

PauL

I can't understand why Winston Smith uses that handle - lest it be his real name of course.

Victor, thank you for giving me a laugh. I was just recalling the adoring crowds at Obamas Ich-Bin-Ein-Berliner speech.

Augustus

Archie, 14th/8.38pm -

The international consensus would help a successful policy of containment, much as a patient would be isolated with dangerous symptoms. There is, of course, Russia and China to contend with. Although a nuclear capable Iran is not really in Russia's interests, it did sign a $7bn arms deal with Tehran less than a month after 9/11, and in 2003 the CIA issued a report crediting Russian, Chinese, and N.Korean experts with Iran's ballistic-
missile advances.

It is also valid to make the point that, however odious great numbers of Iranians find Ahmadinejad, they would probably respond to a strike by America or Israel by rallying round the flag.

Dixon

"Stephen Rothbart: Totally irrational people cannot be deterred. Only the application of superior force can restrain them"

No but totally irrational ( or so-seeming ) people are very good at intimidating the rational. This was Henry Kissingers argument when he said the US should act nuts so as to intimidate the USSSR. Its the biggest problem with a nuclear Iran: they wont need to actually do anything with the weapons but possess them...everyone else perceiving them as volatile nutters with a death-wish will be inclined to concede to their every demand.

Then those demands will flourish. Eventually encompassing such matters as the ( special ) status of Muslims in any country on Earth.

This is the thing, the Iranians dont need to actually deploy the weapons. Look at the problem we are having with Pakistan. A supposed ally perpetually stabbing us in the back. Then ask yourself how our relationaship with them would have altered by now had they not possessed nuclear weapons within striking distance of our ( genuine ) allies in India.

However, as I said earlier, US politicians may be willing to sell out Israel but they cannot ignore the threat a nuclear Iran would pose to the oil-supply from Saudi Arabia. At the moment the American left fantasise about a "green" post hydrocarbon economy, but they will eventually realise that this wont likely happen this century.

Derek BLADES

Dear Tumbledore. This contribution is motivated by what you wrote on 14 September. Now I should come clean and tell you right off that I support both abortion and homosexuality and, furthermore, I prefer 21st century moral values to those prevailing when the Thorah was being assembled. In view of this it is unlikely that I can open your mind to some fresh air and straight thinking, but let me try anyway.

Iran lives in a dangerous part of the world. The seven countries with which it shares land-borders are Afganistan Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey and Turkmenistan. Until recently Turkmenistan was ruled by a certified mad man, Iraq recently launched a murderous and unprovoked seven-year war against it with material and morale support from Israel and the United States, Pakistan has both nuclear weapons and the means of delivering them. A nuclear armed and hostile American fleet is lurking off-shore. To add to its misery an aggressive and politically unstable enemy in the region - Israel - has more than a hundred nuclear weapons. It threatens to bomb Iran and recently carried a practice run over Greece to test the IAF's navigation and refuelling capability.

I put it to you Trumplebore – in these circumstances would it not be irresponsible behaviour by the Iranian government if they did NOT acquire the ability to build a nuclear bomb at short notice?
Wisely, Barack Obama is still talking about total nuclear disarmament and that is surely the best hope for mankind. In the meantime though, let's not deny Iranians the right to feel safe in their own country.

Liz SA

Derek BLADES. Yes, wouldn't it be nice if Iranians could feel safe in their 'own' country. Interesting how you can be so magnanimous towards Iran and and always so scathing towards Israel. However, given your wonderfully enlightened "thinking" why am I not surprised that you use hypocrisy as the foundation stone for your arguments.

john Norman

Herbert Thornton: we will not know who has detonated a nuclear device in Chicago or London but, logically, as the Iranians assure us they have no nuclear weapons ambitions, the suspicion will fall on N. Korea. N. Korea will be dealt with appropriately and will serve as a warning to anyone tempted to explode another device. Pyong Yang will be dust and rubble and a dozen other cities. China take note

Dave M

macumazan
"It's already too late. The very possibility that Iran has nukes will rule out any IAF strike on it."

It's not too late for Israel to take the plunge and deal with the Iran threat via targeted air strikes and my bet is Israel will do just that. At the end of the day, any situation whereby a country such as Iran gains a nuclear capability is out of the question - plain suicide for the civilized world. From the 9/11 hijackers to the fanatics in Beslan and Madrid we ought to know by now there are terrorists out there who worship death and destruction as an ideology. They actually believe killing thousands of civilians will lead them to 72 virgins in paradise. The USSR on the other hand, was led by totally rational people who understood the dangers of war after the invasion of Hitler. Back then, it was whole different ballgame and nobody really sought a conflict, not Krushchev and not Brezhnev.
If Israel permits Obama's diplomatic stumbling to allow iran time to acquire W.M.D. then the alternative is going to be underground bunkers all over Telaviv, warning sirens and thousands of missiles aimed at Iran. To avoid such an escalation, as has been said before, it would be better to deal with a smaller mess here and now, neutralise Iran's capacity and then the whole world can breathe a little easier.

Track-A-'Crat

More so even than acts of strength, acts of weakness on this scale are never forgotten:

http://trackacrat.com/2009/09/14/serious-negotiations-now-friendly-chat/

Well done, Barry.

Dixon

Why Oh Why Oh Why is it that whenever I try to type "USSR" it comnes out as "USSSR" if not actually "USSSSDR"? I do aplologise.

Meanwhile, when considering Irans nuclear "ambitions" there is an interesting "thought experiment" to be performed. Simply wonder why, if they are intent purely on "civil nuclear power" as they insist, they do not by now have ANY civilian nuclear power stations?

John Edwards

Derek Blades is a welcome voice of sense among the nutters

Linda Smith

I'd like to suggest that Derek Blades toddles over to Iran and tells the Ayatollahs he supports homosexuality and prefers 20th century mores to 7th century Islam. Might find himself swinging from a gibbet.

daniel maris

So Derek Blades supports acquisition of nuclear weapons by the totalitarian anti-democratic Mullah regime in Iran.

At least we are clear on that.

Dave

Since we're quoting Winston Churchill:

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last."

Augustus

John Edwards, a nutter is usually considered to be a person dispaying a marked lack of consistency in thought and
action. How revealing then that Derek BLADES, who likes to display his undying allegiance to human rights, now decides to legitimize with all his heart an
Iranian government that manipulated its presidential election in June, and brutally crushed protests after the vote.
I wonder whether the fact that their terror-sponsoring government is antisemitic has anything to do with it?

Archie

Augustus: thank you for reminding me of Russia and China and their seemingly laissez-faire attitude to many regimes we think are odious. What position would they take if serious sanctions were proposed? The Chinese would - as usual - ensure that their economic interests were best served, whilst the Russians seem perfectly happy to make mischief wherever they can. Which brings me to the point of my previous post which is that now America seems eager to talk to Teheran, and bearing in mind the ambivalence of Russia and China, who would form this international consensus?

david

Derek,
You point to your support for abortion (which many, including myself, would call infanticide) and homosexuality as proof of how open your mind is. You infer a date for this wider ¡¥enlightenment¡¦ as being the start of the 21st century and juxtapose it with the backwardness of the thinking/morality that you imply went into ¡¥the assembly of the Torah¡¦ (I assume you¡¦d include the Bible and the Koran in that statement?).
That was an opening paragraph that was guaranteed to get everyone¡¦s attentionƒº! You then claim that Iran needs nuclear weapons because of its dangerous neighbours which include AFGHANISTAN (far too many Iranian weapons infiltrated to the Taliban there, I suppose), AZERBAIJAN (Pop¡¦n = 8.8m; Adheres to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and has signed all major international arms and weapons treaties), ARMENIA (Pop¡¦n=3.2m; 33 airplanes; Adheres to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and has signed all major international arms and weapons treaties) and TURKMENISTAN (Did the ¡§certified madman¡¨ who ruled the country also believe in the imminent arrival of a 12th imam?). You also noted non-nuclear Iraq as a dangerous threat to Iran because it previously invaded Iran (back in 1980 under the stewardship of Saddam Hussein).
Just as an aside and given the same geopolitical considerations, would your open minded thinking conclude that Belgium, Lichtenstein, Singapore, Panama, Cuba, Nicaragua and Georgia should have nuclear weapons too? If you support their claims to nuclear weapons, then where do you draw the nuclear non-proliferation line?
Back to the main point¡K..Your argument inherently accepts that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and you simply pivot the argument around whether Iran has the right to have them. The truth is that you don¡¦t think that Iran should have nuclear weapons because Armenia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan etc are a threat to it any more than you think that Lichtenstein should have nuclear weapons because France is a threat. Instead, you believe that Iran should have nuclear weapons because Israel has them. Period!
Iran is an autocracy that supports and funds terrorism, which has provided thousands of missiles to Hizbullah and Hamas, which open advocates the destruction of Israel (http://www.bing.com/search?q=iran+calls+for+destruction+of+israel&form=QBRE&filt=all) and which has a leader who agitates for the return of a 12th imam. In contrast, Israel does not admit to the existence of the nuclear weapons that it has owned for the past 42 years and has not threatened their use. Israel is a major weapons producer but hasn¡¦t exported their weaponry to the countries that border Iran. Israel is a true democracy and doesn¡¦t advocate the destruction of Iran and its people. Israel does not fund and support international terrorism.
You don¡¦t seem to differentiate between the different contexts of nuclear armament/ownership. In fact, at the end of reading your many posts about Israel, I cannot but conclude a deep resentment toward Israel and, at that point, I question whether your attitude to the country and its population is really all that new or enlightened.

GaryO

People are missing the point, which is that our Western governments (and therefore by definition a majority of our citizens) want Iran to have the nuclear bomb.

They want to destroy Israel but could not bring themselves to do it so they allow Iran (just like they permitted pakistan to have the bomb - to destroy India) in the hope that their temperament will not be able to resist the urge once they have the bomb.

Our governments have allowed Iran to get so far ahead with its programme that there is not a single force in the world (yes, that includes Israel) that can stop it now.

No doubt the Democrats are laughing in their sleeves.

logdon

Suki
September 13th, 2009 10:43pm

I agree.

Red Neck Boy

Iran

Isn't that the place with Palm Oil as its 2nd biggest export ?

Hmm.

Some enemy.

George Warburton

Chamberlain is rolled out as villain whenever some politician chooses to take the easy, palatable option rather than face up to the reponsibilities attached to his/her office.
But was Chamberlain guilty? I was told some long time ago of a book written by his doctor (possibly Lord Horder, the 1930's doctor of choice) that suggested that our then Prime Minister was not taken in by Hitler, rather that he returned home to warn of Adolf's lunacy and to prepare for war.
Having said all that, I cannot find a reference to the book anywhere on the net. Perhaps you can help.

Linda Smith

Do all these loopy non-Muslim Westerners who want Iran to have a nuclear bomb want to be dhimmis?

Dave M

"Our governments have allowed Iran to get so far ahead with its programme that there is not a single force in the world (yes, that includes Israel) that can stop it now."

This is an exaggeration, I think. Let's be clear Iran is far from being on a par with "superpower status". Even if Iran does manage to acquire nuclear capability, it would still be light years away from Russia or America's military might. No high tech submarines, fighter planes, multiple warhead missiles or satellite guidance systems. For that matter, it would still be hugely outmuscled by Israel in military technology. Added to that, I seriously don't believe Israel will allow Iran to get nuclear weapons when push comes to shove and time will soon tell if I'm right on that score. Iran is basically too unstable and too dangerous for Israel to tolerate having W.M.D.
Again, let's be clear Iran isn't a superpower, currently has a conventional army and fairly dated military technology. It's also highly unstable and could easily fall into civil war, given the fact the majority of Iranians resent the current regime that's imposed on them.
The main problem with Iran is the U.S. currently lacks the moral nerve to confront the situation after George Bush's disastrous meddling in Iraq. So, it really is up to Israel and you can only wonder what the fallout in America will be if the Israelis do take the bull by the horns and act.

Ali Mostofi

The last thing the world wants is more competition from a part of the world that is more proud, with a huge chip on its shoulder.

Imagine all those shrewd Iranian business men in California, especially the Armenian and Jewish Iranian communities returning back to Iran; to set up industries to compete with the rest of the world. Remember Iran has more gas and oil than all most all, and is very well located to distribute all this. It and the surrounding Caspian states have a huge population of under 25s all eager to build.

The only way to stop this, is to allow the mad mullah to make his bomb and make Iran another pariah state like North Korea.

That is why Iran is in the state it is in now.

Dave M

"Remember Iran has more gas and oil than all most all, and is very well located to distribute all this. It and the surrounding Caspian states have a huge population of under 25s all eager to build."

The problem is 9/11 opened a lot of peoples' eyes to the dangers of radical religious fervour and militancy. Neither was that the only instance of planned terror and mass murder perpetrated in the name of religion, as Beslan was also quite horrific. Therefore, it stands to reason a lot of people feel more than nervous about the idea of a country such as Iran getting hold of the bomb. This is a country, after all, that hates Jews on the basis of religious dogma and is led by fanatical clerics, many of who would love to see Israel "wiped off the map". What is even more astounding is despite the fact not a single Jew had anything to do whatsoever with all these terrorist outrages, America is currently bending over backwards to pacify more extreme muslims, cold shouldering Israel in the process. The same applies to Europe. It's an amazing turn of events and Israeli politicians must find the whole situation baffling. If Iran is allowed to develop nuclear arms there's no doubt this will pose a huge threat to western civilization. It could even lead us to a catastrophic scenario that would dwarf 9/11 by comparison. Thus, the likes of John Bolton are 100 per cent right when they warn Iran mustn't be allowed to get hold of these weapons. These are not rational people but swear death and destruction to Israel and the Great Satan and so forth. The liberals who simply shrug off the implications of all of this are making a huge miscalculation. No amount of appeasement will get us anywhere with such regimes.

Ali Mostofi

"These are not rational people but swear death and destruction to Israel and the Great Satan and so forth."

That statement applies to a small minority who barely control the machinery of state.

The rest of Iran live with the Spirit of Nowrooz. We Iranians relate to the ancient glorious Iran, that created The Zend-Avesta and The Declaration of Human Rights.

Please do not mix Iranians with Seyyeds.

Augustus

Ali Mostofi, are you saying that
this 'small minority' of irrational people wouldn't control the nuclear button? and even if these people were to act rationally, they could still decide to strike first with nuclear weapons. Nuclear proliferation in the ME could never create the same sort of stable equilibrium that was once obtained between the US and the USSR. Israel is only really safe if it remains the only nuclear power.

Ali Mostofi

The only reason these pathetic idiots are in Iran, is because they create the false fear that US needs to be in the area. Pax Americana needs this. The US companies in China need this.

The Seyyeds would disappear in a week if the US media wanted to. The Shah was much harder to get rid of, and they did that in a snap.

The people of Iran will get rid of these people themselves, if they can organise a non-violent general strike. Currently there is a silent movement, by the silent majority to do this.

Our battle is with the US media, that wants to keep the US military there. The mullahs and their so called WMDs are not the problem.

TD

I think they've come to the view that Iran will develop a nuke. They have also decided not to attack Iran. They figure the regime will eventually collapse. So they're going to talk, surround Iran with anti-missile technology, co-operate with Russia to win tough sanctions etc.

The problem is this - Iran doesn't need to use a nuke. It just has to have them. It can then insulate its allies and spread trouble, with far greater leverage than before. Imagine if the Taliban took control of Pakistan. That's what we're looking at here.

Which is why the strategy is dead wrong.

Ali Mostofi

You all seem to miss the point. This little man has no power. He has sacked so many people, that the so called Majlis, has actually no authority. There is dissent everywhere from within the system. The whole thing is going to fall apart. No one wants to be part of this fiasco. Big power politics has no part in all this, even though, as I said, the US media wants the Iranian people to appear as the villains in the area. Clearly the bandits in charge need to be isolated from within Iran, and the Iranians who put their culture above Islam are doing just that. You could say their is a sort of distillation going on. For example look at the Basij. They used to be regarded as heros. No longer. They are seen as the worst villains in Iran after they killed so many Iranians. Most of these Basijis were masked Arabs. So the Seyyeds and their friends are surrounded by the real Iranians. It is only a matter of time. It can be speeded up if the western press tells the truth. But we have to trust Twitter for now, as Iranians have all become a nation of journalists. Every young person has his eyes and ears peeled, watching these aliens from within. We are taking care of our mess ourselves in our own sweet way.

Dave M

"Nuclear proliferation in the ME could never create the same sort of stable equilibrium that was once obtained between the US and the USSR. Israel is only really safe if it remains the only nuclear power."

I was encouraged to hear Obama seems to be taking a sensible attitude towards Russia, more than likely to prevent Israel taking a military option. There was never any need or practical advantage to be gotten from another Cold War with Russia. I've lived in Russia and studied Russia for some years and these days Russia just wants to get rich as an economy. They have no wish to get into armed conflicts. If Obama can normalise relations with Russia I'm sure Russia will turn the heat on Iran to drop the WMD program.
In some ways you have to feel a bit sorry for Obama as he takes a lot of hype simply for trying to resolve conflicts without war, and just being more diplomatic. The only snag is as Melanie says he's not taken seriously enough in Iran and may appear a bit wishy-washy. However, his position seems to be one of trying to reach out to all and trying to be neutral.

Ali Mostofi

If anyone has any control over the Seyyeds/Theocrats it is the Chinese, not the Russians. But the whole scenario is more complicated than that. The western companies like Wal-Mart that are in China, are the one who force China to make long term energy deals with the Seyyed/Theocrats, with no concern for what the Seyyeds/Theocrats do with the funds. The Chinese are the main culprits in this era of the world history, as they have allowed the various countries they import from to do whatever they like. But it is not really the Chinese is it. It is the cheap labour that the western firms get in China that is more akin to slavery, that is behind this whole mess. The Seyyed/Theocrats supply the cheap oil that enables cheap products to be made for Wal-Mart in China. So it is a combination of Seyyeds/Theocrats and the Chinese/Western Companies.

Trumpeldor

@Derek Blades,

I respect all opinions
Yours is quite valuable but sorry ,I do not agree.
Iran is not threatened by any of his neighbours and on the contrary,his race to atom weapons is a quest for power in the region and to destroy the tiny Jewish State
I must tell you that my humble opinion is shared by many Iranian friends and they are not Jewish.....
I do think that some crash courses in world history would be a great asset for your brain
I am quite confident that your billion of neuron cells would be adequate to process that much needed task
"People who ignore lessons from the past are condemned to relive them"
You should think about it
In the meantime,I do wish you and Melanie and all bloggers,

HAG SAMEAH HAPPY NEW YEAR
MAY THE ALMIGHTY REGISTER YOU IN THE BOOK OF LIFE FOR THE FORTHCOMING YEAR !