What is your impression of the threat posed by Iran?

[coloradodem2005]

Is it more real than Iraq? If so, how much? Should we do anything about them? Your thoughts please.

[NMDemDist2]

1. if we weren't so overdeployed, we should be taking care of the mess

in Korea


He's the one who really scares me

[JanMichael]

5. Yep. It's only a mater of time until he snaps.

AND they have nukes plus the ability to deliver them.

Not to the US west coast...yet. Their three stage missile is working quite well.

[burythehatchet]

9. how could he scare anybody...he's adorable!

in a sick and twisted sort of way

[oldhat]

10. I'm sure

I'm sure all of the people he's starved to death and murdered in the slave labor camps think he's adorable, too.

Idiot.

[burythehatchet]

21. I'll give you a pass on the last word in your post,

because I'm assuming you were referring to somepne other than me.

Dooshbag.

[Carni]

19. I agree he's the real nut

In the equation!

[CaTeacher]

2. I don't believe that Iran is a threat to us.

I do NOT want any more war in the Middle East. I say that we bring our troops home and leave these people alone. (And that we quit all American efforts to surreptitiously overthrow the lawful government of Iran)

[Worst Username Ever]

3. More of a threat than Iraq ever was

but whoops now what the fuck are we going to do.

[tom_paine]

4. Without a Free Country's Intelligence apparatus and Free Press

Who can tell?

[voice of reason]

13. I believe we have a free press

it just isn't part of the big media. The free press is the thousands of blogs and individuals contributing to boards like these.

Big media is too concerned with the BUSINESS of news, to accurately and completely report anything, regardless of the repective news agency's idealogical leaning. In my eyse the Times is the same as the WSJ is the same as the Chicago Post is the same as CNN is the same as Faux. I just don't pay attention to them anymore.

I cull lots of little stuff from all over and form my own picture.

v.o.r.

[tom_paine]

24. Sad that we are forced to do that and that our media has so swiftly

become a disgrace and a Global Laughingstock.

If the rest of the world begins to emulate Imperial Pravda, then the Age of Totalitarianism will most certainly follow.

[bluestateguy]

6. It probably does represent a threat

Containment, weapons inspections and the threat of limited air strikes as a last resort would be the policy I would support.

The Iranian regime is corrupt and medieval, but it's not the job of American boys to fight and die to overthrow a regime that Iranian boys ought to overthrow.

But I cannot believe anything this Administration says. Their credibility is shattered.

[Abe Linkman]

7. WHAT threat?

You mean, the fact that it's very likely to be the next country that poor black and brown Americans + untold thousands of Iranians get killed in because, because unless they do, Halliburton will have a tough time maintaining it's stock price? Is that what you mean by "threat"?

[katusha]

8. hmmmm...

well, if we consider the scenario that iran used chalabi to play up to bush's predisposition to attack iraq, and knowing full well that they could keep the american military tied up in iraq by creating instability, and then used our forces being overstretched as cover for them to make a sustained push to fully develop their nuclear capability, i'd say if that scenario is correct then we are in serious trouble. trouble because these guys way outclass the clowns we have in power now, if they have played them like this.

[Beam Me Up]

11. Ding Ding Ding --- we have a WINNER!

Yes, the real THREAT to us that Iraq poses is their ability to manipulate our own leadership into making the blunder of over exposing our forces in the Middle East.

You win the coveted PLASTIC TURKEY AWARD!

[katusha]

17. hooray!!

i'd like to think all the little folks who made this possible...

:-)

[maxsolomon]

12. threat to whom? where? when?

iran is going to lob a nuke at us? puh-leez.

or at israel, the 51st state?

seems to me any capacity they have is pure deterrence to the US. THEY are scared of US. and i don't blame them.

[drdigi420]

14. the threat posed by bush is much much worse

[bowens43]

15. No threat at all.

nor is North Korea, or Syria or anyone else. The US is by FAR the most powerful nation in the history of the world. No country is going to attack us. Deterrence worked with the Soviet Union and it works with everyone else. There is no country out that that could launch an attack on the US that would prevent us from completely destroying them. It's not going to happen.

[K-W]

16. They pose no major threat.

There is not a country in this world that plans to attack the United States under any circumstance besides self defence. We are the reigning super power in the world with a nuclear arsenal capable of ending life on earth as we know it.

Iraq was never going to attack us, Iran is never going to attack us, even North Korea will not attack us unless we attack them first or WW3 starts. The leaders of these nations are not idiots. They are fanatical and devious, but not idiots.

We need to end this discussion now. This is an issue for the UN and Nato, not for the United States to consider on its own.

[Carni]

18. In light of what they are pulling in Iraq-the Iran thing is not good

I am not a ME expert and in fact I may have my head up my ass on the topic BUT....

The US has installed a "Pres" of Iraq that is basically a Saudi raised individual and mindset type (he's also a Sunni)

Chalabi (the bush admins previous golden boy) is tied to Iran and he's a shiite--the bulk of Iraq is comprised of Shiite muslims.

If the Shiites start thinking they are getting a raw deal under another Sunni US installed leader (Saddam was also one, although he was secular/communist acting for most of his "career" as dictator)

We will have big time problems (IMO we already do)

If they want to take on Iran... now they are taking on a unified Iran/Iraq.

JMO

[denverbill]

20. Very minimal.

Even if they got nukes, and then got a delivery system capable of hitting the US, does anyone in their right mind believe they would actually hit us with one? Or does anyone believe they'd attack Israel with one even?

Sorry, but nuclear weapons a the world's best, and maybe only, deterrent. Iraq proved that. If Iraq had nukes, Saddam would still have been in power.

[BeHereNow]

22. The REAL threat is this:

The neocons fully intend to control the ME.
They are building the largest US embassy ever there
along with 14 permanent military bases.
They are installing war criminals like Negraponte and
a former CIA funded terrorist in positions of running
the colliseum for the Empire.
The agenda long term is to control the pipelines
in the ME. Period.
The REAL threat is that Russia and China are NOT
going to let that happen.
A coaltion of China and Russia and other countries
IS something to fear.
The US military can NOT win a war with an international
military united to prevent the multi national corporation's
hegemonic takeover and control of the world's oil.
Iran is the variable, not the threat.
The US fully intends to try and bully them into
cooperating with "the pipeline plan..." If they succeed
in that effort, cover your ass, because THAT'S when
all hell is gonna break out.
BHN

[Karenina]

26. Those *lunatics

who have seized the American gub'mint pose the largest clear and present danger to World Peace, stability and security ever seen in the history of this sorry-assed species.

Tell'em about it BHN. :loveya: :toast:

[DrWeird]

23. Iran poses a threat?

I think I have a greater risk of getting run over by Laura Bush.

[Strelnikov_]

25. All The Hydrocarbon Indices Indicate An Extreme Threat

Gathering, imminent, do you want to wait for the mushroom cloud? Reports indicate that they have found an oil field larger than SA's Ghahwar and . . . oops . . I mean WMD as big as Saddam's . . oh . . that pygmy in East Korea.

Seriously, none of these countries pose a 'threat' to the survival of our nation. Yes, they can kill 2 to 3 Million (NK that is, Iran poses little threat), if they get lucky, but in the process they will be destroyed while the U.S. buggers on. MAD worked for years, and will work against these nations considering the 'M' part does not apply. Let's face it, most of us lived through the cold war where we faced a hell of a lot bigger threats than NK (and Iran if one so chooses).

Iran could probably have been turned through engagement before King George's Iraq adventure. As for now, who knows?

As for North Korea, they can rain 500,000 shells/day onto Seoul from 'hardened' gun emplacements (not to mention all the other nasty stuff they 'may' have). Any attack on N. Korea's WMD infrastructure will probably result in nearly as large a loss of life as a first strike by NK.

When there are no good options, keep your powder dry, keep diplomatic contacts open, and wait. Time has a way of clarifying things.