>>>>Or one could start from the position: A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable unless not accepting it would require stopping it, in which case ... oh well.
>>>>
>>>>Obviously, if one does not think a nuclear armed Iran is a problem then there is no reason to try to prevent it. If one decides it must be prevented, then options must be broad - especially if the goal is to prevent it through negotiations. A CINC who publicly takes the military option completely out of the equation - especially where the issue is a military one - is not negotiating seriously but simply putting on a show.
>>>>
>>>>I am not a believer in invasions as a preferred tool, and I'd have to be pretty convinced bombing would do it before that looked good. I would prefer more focused efforts.
>>>>
>>>>Once upon a time Iraq was going to build a very very very big gun to point at Israel ...
>>>
>>>Once upon a time Iraq had a nuclear program too. Israel took care of it the first time.
>>
>>And look how effective that was in the long term.
>
>Pretty much 100%. No Iraqi reactor ever went on line and the likelihood of Saddam trying to get the French to build him another one has been greatly reduced ;-) Imagine 1991 Iraq with nukes.
>
>Now imagine 2010 Iran with nukes.
Nuclear power is also about having enough well educated people and a wide industrial base.
Which sort of bombing is going to prevent that.
Its going to happen one day and we may as well start dealing with that.
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement