Quote:
|
Originally Posted by irateplatypus
this can't be good for middle east stability. iran has drawn a lot of international attention about recent developments in their nuclear program. it appears that should they ever actually develop a nuclear weapon, they have a system that can deliver it to europe and israel. it appears that even a pre-emptive strike on nuclear facilities like the one israel carried out against iraq decades ago has a check against it. iran would now be able to counter a surgical attack without moving its manned conventional forces across international boundaries as well as retaliate on a moment's notice.
|
No, it is not good for Middle East stability in the least.
The effort to convince Iran to not pursue strategic enhancement of its military is unfortunately all but a lost cause. Given the current world situation, it is nearly impossible to convince Iran that she is not in grave danger of being attacked by a foreign country. Any assurances of security from the US (the most likely agressor at the moment) will fall on deaf ears, given the willingness of the US to go back on its word whenever it feels the need. So thus, the conservative Iranian leadership feels that the only buffer it has against attack is a military capacity to inflict deterrance on potential agressors. Given the obvious superiority of US conventional military forces, un-conventional methods, from nuclear programs to terrorist connections become more appealing to the regime.
So what tools do we have as the United States to prevent the creation of another nuclear power?