The Iran dilemma U.S. has few options to stymie nuclear program

[jbfam4]

Friday, September 24, 2004 OC Register Register to read...

The Iran dilemma
U.S. has few options to stymie nuclear program

http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2004/09/24/sections/commentary/editorials/article_251526.php



The theocratic government of Iran, with its ambitions to spread its peculiar form of overbearing governance throughout the Islamic world and to thumb its nose at the "great Satan" United States, bears primary responsibility, of course. The mullahs who rule the country have been ruthless and ambitious from the start, and they might well have sought nuclear weaponry with or without provocation.


While noting the primary responsibility, however, it is important to note the contribution American policies and actions may have made to this possible nuclear proliferation.

In 2002, President Bush declared the "Axis of Evil" - Iraq, Iran, North Korea - to be a looming threat that must be confronted. In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq.

Is it unreasonable for Iran to learn the lesson from this that if it wants to avoid an invasion, it would do well to get a nuclear deterrent? In the future, however, is it too much to expect our leaders to think through the implications before seeking confrontations, even with oppressive regimes?

[Malva Zebrina]

1. Bush made a reckless accusation before millions

in his best, arrogant, Machiavellian, Straussian, arrogant and ignorant beyond belief, manner. For this his supporters think him resolute and a leader. He deliberately provoked NK and Iran and they respond by building their nuclear defenses against this moron and the United States.

[agincourt]

2. My take on it is,

even if you have good reason to get the mullahs, the dumbest thing you can do is shoot off your mouth and fire your popgun like bush did.
Shrub has been mouthing off the need for regime change over there, why did we tell them that? Does he think they'll revolt because he shoots off his mouth?