Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sun Tzu
If the US restrains Israel not to attack Iran’s nuclear capabilities, then the reality is they will eventually have weapons. Is a world with Iran being a nuclear member a better place? No. Would the situation be any better with going to war with Iran? Well if China decided to overlook its 800 billion oil deal with Iran for the trade arrangements it has with the US then possibly. Would China stay out of this? Would Russia stay out of this?
I think a global conflict is entirely possible from this situation.
|
I'm sorry to hear you're having trouble viewing the video, because I value your input. I don't know offhand where it might be mirrored. I would try YouTube.
As it turns out, Isreal can't attack Iran without crossing over Iraqi airspace. Their fighter jets don't have the range to go around. It is my understanding that Iraqi airspace is essentially US military airspace. So the US military must explicitly authorize any third-party military personnel to cross Iraq's borders. That would mean a de facto declaration of war by the United States against Iran, as the US would be complicit in whatever actions Isreali forces took after crossing into Iran.
Quote:
|
I try and look at both sides of the issue. One of Sun Tzu’s valuable lessons is to look into the minds of the enemy to understand their choices in battle. Iran wants nuclear weapons. Why? It seems most world leaders (not India and Pakistan) understand adding more nuclear arsenal to the world’s collection is pointless since there is already enough to wipe us all out. Logical reasoning aside; is Iran taking the stance that if countries like the US and Israel have nuclear arsenals they have no business dictating who can or can’t have them.
|
According to the IAEA, Iran's enrichment is at 3.5%. Weapons-grade plutonium requires at least 90% enrichment. (I'm sorry, Mojo, I'm sticking to my guns until you provide supporting materials for your data, one element of which appears to have been debunked.)
I believe that if Iran is indeed enriching plutonium beyond known quantities, it intends to use it first and foremost as a bargaining chip. They don't want to lose over a million people to disease, radiation-induced cancer and starvation, as
Iraq apparently did when the US government imposed food and medical sanctions in 1991. (Ironically, the Bush administration claims that, in this same time frame, Iraq was somehow amassing WMDs in sufficient quantities as to be a clear and present danger to the United States.)
Quote:
|
Then one can look at the standpoint of Israel and Iran and state that Israel is not calling for Iran’s destruction. Its leaders aren’t denying things like the holocaust from happening. So why does Iran hate Israel? Through all the politics are reasons. Its obvious Iran’s leader doesn’t like Israel. It can’t be straight anti-Semitism; there are Iranian Jews in Iran living without persecution. One can look at this situation and take the stance “who care’s- they are the enemy it really doesn’t matter what the reasons are- destroy them; or to look into what fueling the situation. I don’t think we have the luxury of the first because I think escalating tensions with China is a big mistake.
|
I believe their hostility towards Isreal stems from what it perceives as
genocide in Palestine. That and the fact that the Arab world generally sees Isreal as an artificially created state, subsidized heavily by the West. I'm not prepared to debate that particular topic, but it strikes me that people have been arbitrarily creating and dividing nations since the concept was first introduced. The key difference here being that what is now Isreal was previously occupied by an established community.