Do you think Iran is trying to make a nuclear weapon in secret? What is the best way to deal with the suspicion over Iran's plans? Are you confident the UN watchdog, the IAEA, can manage the situation? Was Mr Kouchner being realistic - or unhelpful?
2007-12-03 16:04:10 · 8 answers · asked by Pariah 5 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
War with Iran is still up in the air. The United States' position is diplomacy, and indirect measures of pressure. I don't expect this to change anytime soon, as we've stayed pretty firm on the position, and the United States couldn't win a war in the streets of Tehran anyhow. The UN's IAEA is effective in talking to Iran, at least more than we are. I reckon it can be useful, but to who is still up for answering. I think there's a lot more going on in Iran... maybe this is a long shot, but the issue is the lack of western style democracy, and we're using the nuclear issue to build domestic insecurity and international distrust.
I'd say there's no war to be had in Iran, (unless foolishly instigated by Iran) and the IAEA is being useful in proxy manipulations. No doubt there are connections between us and the IAEA none of us know about, and we'd be stupid not to be tappin' that.
2007-12-03 16:24:58 · answer #1 · answered by bablshams 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If Iran doesn't give up its hopes of attaining nuclear weapons, then it is a very likely event in my opinion.
The best way to deal with suspicion is spies, or some other amazing intelligence gathering force to assure that there are DEFINITELY not any nuclear weapons programs going on. As of lately I have no confidence in the UN, because they have a lot of bark and no bite. Sure, it's nice to tell a country "no nuclear weapons", but what's making sure they listen?
2007-12-03 16:49:55 · answer #2 · answered by subxerorock 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, war with Iran isn't likely. For starters, we haven't the military. We are spread thin as it is. Recrutement is down, and are armed forces were already too small to begin with thanks to Clinton's cutbacks.
As for the U.N., it's a joke, the way the UN handles things is to do nothing but bluster and threaten sanctions. They have bigger things to worry about, like what to do with a square flag in a sea of rectangles!
2007-12-03 16:16:14 · answer #3 · answered by Ista 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The ones who want a war are welcome to go and fight. But strange, I find that the minute I say that, usually everyone clams up. Is that because everyone wants someone else to do the dirty work of killing and maiming and brutalizing for them while they sit at home drinking beer and munching on popcorn, oblivious to the cries of pain of those on the frontlines or the billions in funds wasted on the destruction.
War is dirty business(no doubt profitable for the elite) and in the end everyone suffers (except, again, for the elite - unless they have a conscience)
2007-12-03 16:32:23 · answer #4 · answered by pepper 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think Iran is going to be more stubborn because it's being backed by other Muslim countries to defy the U.S. and exert its own power. They are also rich from oil. So there is likely going to be military action against them.
2007-12-03 16:12:46 · answer #5 · answered by I'M GONNA GO PLACES 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not any time soon... It's going to be up to the NEXT President- to decide how to handle the Iranian situation.
2007-12-03 16:14:35 · answer #6 · answered by Joseph, II 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
no chance us might be the big boys but they are only so big and right now they are at there limit and iran is alot difrent proposion than was irac
2007-12-03 16:10:26 · answer #7 · answered by frank 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sounds less likely after todays report.
Yay!
2007-12-03 16:08:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋