tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post4664781893109977880..comments2023-11-03T09:36:22.100-04:00Comments on In From the Cold: OptionsGeorge Smileyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07049707648660651119noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-6136682926879945252010-04-27T08:43:50.432-04:002010-04-27T08:43:50.432-04:00It is not surprising to me that the US is having d...It is not surprising to me that the US is having difficulty coming to grips with the Iranian nuclear program, because you know and I know there is really NOTHING we can do to stop the Iranians from acquiring nuclear weapons capability if they really want it. Full stop. <br /><br />Talk of military strikes, whether by the US or Israel, is pure unadulterated crap. It will not happen, I am now convinced, because every knows it would be futile. At best, such adventures would only delay the inevitable. <br /><br />Even the Israelis know this to be true. So, we continue with the song and dance about sanctions and "all options being on the table." <br /><br />The problem is, the Iranians are smart enough to know there will be not attack. GWBush wanted dearly to launch an attack and the combined analysis of the US military and intelligence apparatus concluded such a course would be folly. Why can't you guys understand that? <br /><br />What is needed now is a strategic approach to the region that incorporates the outcome of an Iranian nuclear weapons capability. It is a headache, but little more than that. It is not the end of the world, unless you people want it to be. Pretty simple to imagine constructing a regional political-military alliance system from Cairo to Baghdad and Amman to San'a. Israel could not overtly be a part of that alliance unless there is comprehensive peace. But that requires Israel to do the correct and responsible thing and make a final peace with the Palestinians, which necessarily involves the evacuation of all the occupied territories including the non-Jewish parts of Jerusalem. Israel is not prepared to do that, though. So we are back where we started talking about idiotic things like Hezbollah's toys . . .Schwerepunkthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00772891426823851608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-65064036321540115422010-04-21T12:14:29.989-04:002010-04-21T12:14:29.989-04:00A very good review. Thanks. I was surprised to s...A very good review. Thanks. I was surprised to see a front page NYT article that would be so clearly uncomfortable for the WH.<br /><br />Adm. Mullin, on Sunday morning, attempted to quiet concerns regarding the lack of a long-term strategy following the Gates memo leak. US viewers and Mullahs in Teheran heard the Admiral explain that we risk catastrophic instability in the region if we cede nuclear weapons to Iran - OR if we act militarily to prevent it - perhaps inferring that the administration is now wrestling with policy paralysis. His assessment may be correct, but did he advertise to Teheran that we are unlikely to ever apply military action on their nuclear facilities since we weigh the alternative equally? <br /> <br />The fact is, it's become obvious to even the most myopic that we are approaching a turning point whereby effective sanctions are extremely unlikely. Hence the Gates leak, updated Iranian timetable estimates by DIA in public testimony, and public reports of Syrian moves to transfer SCUDS to Hezbullah control (as a potential deterrent to Israeli)- all released within 72 hours. <br /> <br />We have an ally in the mid-east that has been "contingency planning" for years in the event a US Administration is unable to address this threat diplomatically or economically - and unwilling to address it militarily. Unfortunately, I think we're basically there.Richhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15390468013273738737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-36665136944162203212010-04-21T12:08:04.482-04:002010-04-21T12:08:04.482-04:00Announce that our secret plan all along was the re...Announce that our secret plan all along was the removal of Saddam so that we could give a nuke or two to an Iraqui regime to counter Iran.<br />Heh, heh.<br />It would be good to remember that Nuclear Iran would have been a threat to Saddam.<br />What would Saddam do?Ed Bonderenkahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03724552853113809036noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-92009022536918630402010-04-21T11:18:52.655-04:002010-04-21T11:18:52.655-04:00I agree that the Iranian nuclear threat is somethi...I agree that the Iranian nuclear threat is something to be very concerned about.<br /><br />The only thing that is unresolved in my mind are the two themes about Iran.<br /><br />1. Iran is technically incompetent. They keep producing photoshopped images and fake or old video footage of supposed new weapons platforms. The best they can do is a slight re-engineering of an F-5. <br /><br />2. Iran is sufficiently technically competent to build a nuclear weapon.<br /><br />It's possible Iran has barely enough technical staff to design and build an atomic bomb but not enough to do anything else. <br /><br />Or the nuclear bomb effort is the same as their other weapons programs, a propaganda campaign.Carlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05789578799626079570noreply@blogger.com