What would be the best way to handle Iran quest for nukes?

Question

SHould we use force or diplomatic solution..?

Answer 1

Good question. If Iran truly wants nuclear capabilities for peace, then let them. We need a way of determining if that is the case. If they aren't, do not let them by any means, first diplomatic, then by force if necessary.

Answer 2

We have to use force while we still can. Once Iran gets nukes and consolidates the power they're gaining from the Iraq debacle, they're going to be a major hostile power that will be too dangerous to take on with conventional weapons.

We've been trying diplomacy with them for 25 years. How's that been working out?

If we don't attack now, there is going to be a nuclear exchange in that region. Better to have another Iraq on our hands than to have countries throwing nukes around.

Answer 3

Have you ever thought why Iraq and Iran tried to get nuclear weapons?
Why?
We usually think that we live in peace without nuclear weapons, right?
But why do they try to get it?

There are 4 types of countries.
1. Natural resources only but no weapon.
2. Natural resources and skill to dig it, but no weapon.
3. Natural resources and skill to dig it, even more weapon.
4. No natural resource.

The first country has an agreement to dig and to survive with the country that has skill to dig natural resources.

Those are no.2 and no.3.

But no2. cannot be allowed to dig another country's natural resources because no.3 don't like it and even more they are strong with weapons.

So, the no.1 country have to an agreement with no.3 country to dig their natural resources, but the income of the natural resources is not 5:5. The no.1 country will take only 2 and the no.3 will take 8.

So the no.1 country try to be a no.2 country to have their own digging skill to survive from the global competition.

After couple of decade, the no.1 country become a no.2 country and they think they can do everything what they want.

But even the no.2 country cannot be against the no.3 country.

Because the world always follow the power.

That's why so many countries that have a lot of natural resources, they tried to protect themselves like Iran, Iraq...

But the US is the strongest country in the world, so many aircraft careers, warships, bombers, fighters.

So, what is the best solution for them?

To buy or develop aircraft careers and fighters?
No, it's expensive, they have to spend all money for that.

The answer is a missile.

Especially long range missiles or ICBMs(Intercontinental Ballistic Missile) are required for them to save money.

What can they do with that?
Nothing. Only for their defence. Not for attack. To attack? Need aircraft career, fighter…

They cannot attack first, they know they will be destroyed all.
But if they are attacked, they can retaliate with missiles.

If no.2 has missiles or nuclear, no.3 cannot attack first.
Because no.3 knows there will be revenges of no.2.
Anyway no.3 will destroy all of no.2.
Even though, big revenges like nuclear weapon is scary for no.3.

Maybe, the US cannot attack Iran first or have to make sacrifices of Europe or Israel.
Because ICBM of Iran can reach there.
If the US let them go on like this, Israel will get angry and attack Iran first.

The US don’t want to let slip the supremacies. One is economic supremacy and the other one is military supremacy. Two supremacies cannot be separated in history.

But Iraq challenged economic supremacy first. How?
They declared they would use Euro currency for payment of oil. The world use dollars as an international currency. Because of oil payment. To buy oil in world market, you need dollars, because the countries that sell oil receive only dollars. But oil selling countries use another currency? What happened? The country use an international currency as a domestic currency will need to pay their deficits.

Now, Iran and North Korea are challenging to military supremacy of the US, oh, why?
Just small countries? They will be defeated.
But what if they proliferate ICBMs or nuclear weapons?

No one country that have ICBMs and nuclear weapons like the US, Russia, France, U.K, China, they didn’t share the technology with the country like no.1 or no.2 to keep or get their supremacy in the world.


So long….

There is no solution for that.


The world war III will not happened. If that thing happened, we’re all dead meat.

Answer 4

personally, I think that there should be WAY more concern from the European and Asian countries...they are much closer to that mayhem than we are. I wonder if France or Canada would think the threat is real if a major city was bombed? Uh, wait...maybe that's what's going to happen. The conspiracy can be that WE, America bomb Canada or France or some other ultra neutral country, blame it on Iran and then get them to join up the cause. There I told the future.

Answer 5

Absolutely and positively identify their nuke sites by satellite and cruise missile the Hell out of those targets. Keep collateral damage to the absolute minimum and use physops on the civilian population and get them to revolt against the current leadership.

Answer 6

From the US standpoint?

Deploy expand our missile defense network by stationing radars and interceptor missiles in Maine.

Accelerate development of the THAAD missile and deploy it in Italy, Great Britain and Poland (countries that went to Iraq with us). Deploy THAAD inside our more reliable Middle East allies.

Then tell the rest of Europe that Iran is their problem.

Answer 7

Conventional attack against one of the "choke points" such as the nuclear facility at Natanz or Isfahan. It would slow their progress considerably....

Answer 8

Give them Plenty of NUKES, we can deliver them via B-52

Answer 9

How about 3000 degrees of American diplomacy detonating over that armpit of the world

Answer 10

Hope Israel nukes them first.