How should the US approach relations with Iran?

Question

A) The US must remember its history with Iran. Pro-West reform efforts - including the 1953 CIA coup that installed the Shah - incited the Islamic Revolution. US-led regime change would once again empower the most backward and hardline elements of radical Islam. The people of Iran must set their own course for freedom. Meanwhile, the US must turn to its EU partners to push for stricter inspections of Iran's nuclear facilities.

B) The US is simply not positioned to stop Iran's seemingly inevitable drive to acquire nuclear weapons. But as it did with the Soviet Union and China before, America can contain and deter Iran's mullahs and their nuclear leverage. Hard-line Islamic rule in Iran is bankrupt and doomed to failure - democratic reformers will eventually seize the day. Patience and pressure, not preemptive war should guide America's approach toward Iran.

C) Iran's hardline Islamic regime, proven connections to terrorists networks, and obvious desire for nuclear weapons make it a particularly dangerous threat. The mullahs who run Iran have repressed freedom at every turn, and show no evidence of ending ties to terrorism. To ensure that Iran does not threaten US security, American forces must be prepared to do to Tehran what they did to Baghdad.

D) Iran presents a serious foreign policy challenge. Most Iranians clearly embrace democratic reform, but its hardline Islamic government seems intractable. Aggressive support for reformer efforts may be unwise at this time. The US must make a concerted effort with its European and regional allies to pressure Iran's regime to cease its nuclear ambitions.

Answer 1

C) Iran's hardline Islamic regime, proven connections to terrorists networks, and obvious desire for nuclear weapons make it a particularly dangerous threat. The mullahs who run Iran have repressed freedom at every turn, and show no evidence of ending ties to terrorism. To ensure that Iran does not threaten US security, American forces must be prepared to do to Tehran what they did to Baghdad.

Unfortunately, it appears that choice C or a variant may be the only option for dealing with this chapter of "The Religion of Peace." Iran's power mongers have demonstrated that they have no intention of allowing diplomacy to halt their pursuit of nuclear weapons. They have been playing the delaying game as they well know that the euro-wafflers (the heart and soul of the [U]seless [N]ations) will be happy to spend years and years whining about how any practical solution to the problem is no good. Years and years to complete their uranium enrichment and nuclear weaponization. Sanctions would appear to be necessary, but both Russia and China oppose them and likely would not fully participate. China has become so oil hungry that it will happily suck down as much black gold as Iran will send to it and Russia isn't far behind. Russia seems prepared to stab anyone in the back who might be prepared to queer their nuclear tecnology, weapons and oil deals with Iran. Russia has a deal in place with Iran for MORE nuclear facilities, they are part of this problem for crying out loud! We all saw how well sanctions worked with Saddam and how happy the UN was to milk the Oil for Food farce while looking the other way as numerous countries violated the sanctions on Iraq. That scandal went all the way to top of the Useless Nations and Kofi knew damned well what was going on. We all know how effective the toothless UN resolutions are. "If you don't abide by our resolution you'll be sorry. We'll pass another resolution next year and then you'll really be up the creek without a paddle!"

No matter how many of the leftist flower children believe that all we have to do is be nice to these infidel haters, the fact remains that psychotic Iranian power base has no intention of halting their nuclear weapons program for any reason. We have no choice but to halt it for them. I don't think we have to have boots on the ground to do it, but I do believe we have to bomb every significant piece of their infrastructure into piles of rubble. Let the UN provide all the necessary humanitarian aid afterward, they aren't even very good at doing that (criminals and warlords end up controlling most if it), but it's about the only use for the UN these days.

Iran wants the capability to nuke the infidels (ANYONE who is not islamist, that means you and me and your friends and loved ones), do we honestly have any practical choice but to bomb them back into the stone age?

Answer 2

Right, got it. Diplomacy instead of threats. Iran wants to talk to the United States only as it perceives the US as its biggest threat. Britain, France, Germany and Russia are really not worth Iran's time.

Answer 3

via B-52

Answer 4

It's one of those isnatnces when we need to talk softly and carry a big stick.

Answer 5

I figure 30,000 feet with the bomb bay doors open would be a good start.

Answer 6

the same as one would approach a rabid dog

Answer 7

whit peace