Iran-US: the next war?

I was thinking recently about Iranian nuclear program and possible options how to deal with this country. Atom bombs in the possession of Iranians mean most probably that another Holocaust will happen soon but this time in the Middle East not in Europe. I read this article, which outlines some undergoing options for the U.S. government http://www.europeancourier.org/18.htm However I still believe that any diplomatic actions against Iran will eventually fail and the West will find itself in a position either to agree that Iran has nuclear weapons or militarily destroy the present Iranian regime and its nuclear program. Both options are scary, however I strongly prefer Iran without nukes even if the cost would be another war

Hello Tito, were you aware that a country that develops nuclear technology is seen as advancing, that it is a time honored celebrated accomplishment, a mile stone of a country's ascention from such classifications as third and second world to first.

If the US was worried about Iran's nuclear capability, they wouldn't have helped them in its development over the past few decades.

Upon answer of some of D's questions above, I expect to hear things such as Achmed being more dangerous because he is a religious extremist.

This would mean he kills in the name of his religious beliefs, I am currently unaware of a citing of this nature, but have not researched it by any means, so please indulge me with any info.

But that would lead me to ask you a question, if you are worried about religious extremists with nukes, what are your thoughts on Bush?

He is a self proclaimed "evangelical" christian, not your ordinary christian. This is a fundamentalist branch, sure, not itself enough qualification to merit "extremist".

But, what then is a religious fundamentalist who starts a war, especially one who claims god told him to?

Zionists Want to Evade Blame for Coming Iran War

The largest Jewish newspaper in the United States, the Jewish Week, has expressed concern that Americans are learning the truth about the Jewish political and media influence driving America toward war with Iran. Here is how the article begins: "President Bush is risking a backlash that could injure the Jewish community -- and his own cause -- by repeatedly citing Israel as his top rationale for possible U.S. military conflict with Iran, Jewish leaders and Middle East analysts warned this week."

Of course, the entire plan for an Iran War is about Israel and not the United States. Israel is behind it, the neocons are behind it, and the Jewish extremists that have such disproportionate influence in the media are behind it.

But the extremist Jewish political and media powers continue to push for a war with Iran that could well drive the price of oil into the stratosphere, unleash terrorism across the globe, and usher in worldwide economic and military Armageddon.

Continued:

http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=8833



.

Watching the boob tube, A female islamic type who had written a book on the Koran and reinterpeting it into modern society was the guest for this Pro Bush (War?) talk show. Toward the end he did mention that his father had died in Iran. So his perspective on Iran showed.
Her view seemed to express that fundalmentalism (terrorist) were a problem that the "silent majority" of Islam needed to deal with them while his was stated as we needed to deal with them. I think she has a valid point, More moderate thinker of religious fevor should deal with those extremist of their own religion, take them into tow, reason & study with them that better understand their religion.
I can understand his point of view perhaps He should understand that his feeling about Iran, have the same dynamics as theirs toward the USA. It was our support of an Iranian dictator, who was right up their with Saddam in the dirty pool. So like Iran, the War in Iraq isn't about democracy nor human rights, it is about furthering US cause in the middle east. In this case, Bushite will to enforce their desires upon others. (In the Middle East or in the USA) mskes no difference to them, cause you know they wouldn't go around violating the Our Constitution if it was about Democracy!

quote:

---

fundalmentalism (terrorist)

---

These words do not equate.

quote:

---

More moderate thinker of religious fevor should deal with those extremist of their own religion, take them into tow, reason & study with them that better understand their religion.

---

How? Kill them? That is what we are doing anyway, to be sure.

You suggest reasoning with them. Again, how? Religious fundamantalists have no sense of reason, their opinion and rational comes from a set standard with no room for deviation, and any suggestion to see things differently are seen as the work of Devils, demons, and evil people.

We suffer this same problem of religious fundamentalists in posistions of power as it is. And I don't see the Christian or Jewish community ready to reason them out of power, generally its quite the opposite.

This ousting of power will only happen if the general religious communities come to believe that these leaders are not truly of "the faith". Nothing else matters to them, their only concern is if you are in the club or not.

I tend to be in agreement with you, IronWood, at least fundamentally?
I was stating her position as an indication that Christian & Jews, etc should seek to moderate with others of their faith on the principles of their faith.
True enough Bush may call himself Christian but his actions seak louder than his mouthing of words. If one professes to follow some principles then follow those principles. By GOD's Grace do Christians receive grace but by acting accordingly does one maintain that Grace.
Oh, Is that Scriptural?

quote:

---

Zionists Want to Evade Blame for Coming Iran War {/quote].
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6414771.stm
[quote]Learning Lessons
The US has examined the possibility of military strikes on other countries' nuclear facilities in the past.
It came closest in 1994, when a White House meeting discussing whether to strike North Korea was interrupted by news of a possible deal over the country's nuclear programme.
The option of military strikes against Pakistan's Kahuta plant were also examined in the late 1970s but ruled out because the chances of success were rated too low when compared to the consequences of going ahead.
But there is one important precedent for an attack on nuclear facilities.
In June 1981, eight Israeli fighter jets took only 90 seconds to destroy Iraq's Osirak reactor in an audacious bombing raid. It is sometimes cited as a precedent for a US or Israeli (or joint) attack on Iran, but is it really a useful parallel? But did the Osirak raid stop - or even significantly slow down - the Iraqi nuclear programme?

---

Well the US certainly knows how to win over friends & influence people . . . yes indeed the Ugly American!