English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Rush in and invade? Leave it for the next guy to deal with? One-on-one talks? Push for Sanctions? Try to make a deal? Hit thier research sites? Do nothing?

Assume that the main objective is to prevent them from gaining the technology to produce nuclear weapons.

2007-02-18 12:44:11 · 25 answers · asked by jabb0404 2 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

25 answers

First andForemost, use North Koreas progress as a Blueprint on how to make diplomacy and patience work.

Most people dont know that Iraqi president is not fairing very well within his own government. He has two years to go, and his current ramblings arent speaking ofr the entire government.

Hes basically the indentical to how Bush is going against everything his government and people want.

So we at least attempt negotiations. This way his own government can see what hes doing, and how hes causing instability in the region.
Maybe they will remove him.

If in that time he remains in power, then we start a firm approach with U.N. support, that equals stronger sanctions.
Sanctions alone will strangle this country.

It will be a political game with China and Russia as well. But just like North Korea dude is finally giving way, so in time will Iran.

Allthewhile we start a full court press against Al queda!
IRAN is one of the happiest countries seeing how we have toppled Saddam. They are more prone to diplomacy right now then ever before.
But Bush wont allow people to understand that.

That would be the start of it all.
Because if we continue on Bushes plan, then we would merely try military efforts in a region thats already shed too much blood.

At least give Diplomacy a chance Mr President!

2007-02-18 12:51:52 · answer #1 · answered by writersbIock2006 5 · 1 2

the president of Iran is rather plenty powerless like the queen of britain. he's frequently a nut activity who shoots off on the mouth. "in comparison to many different international locations, in Iran the president does not have administration over remote places coverage, the army, nuclear coverage, or the considerable financial rules of the Iranian state, that are decrease than the administration of the splendid chief."

2016-10-15 23:31:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well they don't have the technology and if they started working on it today it would take them a decade, with no way to deliver it!

Section IV of the NPT allows them to use nuclear power and you must enrich Uranium to 5% to generate electricity! They only have a little 3% which was inspected, proving Bush a liar once again!

What is everyone so hot under the collar? Because Bush THINKS they might work on a bomb! Sorry, I need more proof than that!

NPT TREATY:

Article IV

1. Nothing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of this Treaty.

2. All the Parties to the Treaty undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Parties to the Treaty in a position to do so shall also co-operate in contributing alone or together with other States or international organizations to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world. "

2007-02-18 12:55:34 · answer #3 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2 1

Bush and Cheney should both just resign right now. They are the biggest threats to our national security.

For all I know the WMD situation in Iran could have been a lot worse than Iraq. Maybe something should be done or could be done now but I don't trust Bush to let him be the one to do it.

I like the idea of having congress elect a president for the next two years, then maybe congress and the president could work together on this.

Otherwise just hold on Iran, Bush only has two years left to go. We'll talk then.

2007-02-18 13:01:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Have a summit with the real powers in the area, CHINA and RUSSIA. Have them offer some carrots and see if the Iranians bite...otherwise the US can not be trusted to be an honest broker due to their current deceptive ways. They are claiming that the Iranians are supplying the weapons that are killing the soldiers and this is a flat lie. The Iranians are Shia and the Soldiers are being killed by Sunnis...why would the Iranians supply the Sunnis...~~~W

2007-02-18 12:51:34 · answer #5 · answered by Winter Storm 2 · 2 2

I'd do the same thing Reagan did with the Gorbachev.

Sit down with Ahmadinejad, one on one, look him squarely in the eye, and say, "Let me tell you why it is we distrust you".

That memorable line was the beginning of the end of the Cold War. Let's see if it can work again.

2007-02-18 13:13:40 · answer #6 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 0 0

i would do nothing, let them do what they want. let them kill themselves. the only reason we are there is oil anyway. how long is it going to take the american public to realize that its oil. the only reason for them to have a democratic society is so we can get to the oil. the us has put alot of money into the development of refineries and technology for alot of these countries, taking advantage of their ignorance for capital gain. its just like taking land from the native americans. same thing. our citizens for the most part, will behind the country, right or wrong. the roman empire comes to mind. think about it.

2007-02-18 13:03:49 · answer #7 · answered by chris l 5 · 1 1

I'm conservative ,so I would say we have talked enough and I would bomb with aircraft for about a month than send in the ground force.once all the government that backed the terrorists are dead I would head to Syria.

2007-02-18 15:16:14 · answer #8 · answered by shawnn 4 · 1 0

But preventing other countries from doing the same things that we allow ourselves to do is hypocritical and should not be the main objective. Iran is to be congratulated both on its technical expertise and on ignoring Bush.

2007-02-18 12:52:37 · answer #9 · answered by Larry 6 · 1 2

Stop pretending that they are in fact trying to develop nuclear weapons when our own CIA says that there is no evidence that they are...... Then engage in talks with them and ask them for help in Iraq.

2007-02-18 12:55:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers