In response to:

'The Most Dangerous Man in the World'?

Leland Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 3:40 PM
Never underestimate the enemy. The Iranian regime is an enemy of the United States and Israel. It is not rational in the sense western style democracies are rational. Iran has announced the intention to destroy both Israel and the United States. If they develop the capability to accomplish their stated goals, we must assume they will use it. Capability is what counts, not crystal ball assumptions regarding intentions. If the current Iranian regime has nukes, sooner or later they will use them.
John5840 Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 4:13 PM
'Leland, do you realize how completely you contradict yourself? If capability is what counts, as opposed to intentions, why do you focus so intently on intentions?
Leland Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 5:49 PM
John - Possession of nukes will provide Iran's irrational leadership the capability to pursue their repeatedly stated goal of destroying Israel. It is wishful thinking, willful suspension of disbelief, hoping, they will not use any capability they possess invites disaster. They are not deterred by weak western political "leadership" and they are encouraged by the resurgence of western antisemitism. Hope is not a strategy.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 4:07 PM
You did get one thing absolutely right: judge by capabilities, not what you think the intentions are.

On that standard, I say leave the Middle East to its own devices. There is no evidence Iran has any nuclear weapons program, at all. Zero.

They also have very, very limited missile capability. With Chinese Silkworm missiles, they can strike to a maximum range of about 500 km, which is about 310 miles, which is less than the distance from Los Angeles to San Francisco.

A missile fired from Iran would fall about 7,000 miles short of the USA.
IsraelFirsterSecond Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 4:10 PM
My concern is that they are closer and closer to Russia and china. They could just buy some weapons.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 4:12 PM
A crucial defining aspect of "capability," regarding war-making, is a country's industrial base and Gross National Product (GNP). Iran has very, very limited industrial capability. Their GNP is pitifully small, particularly considering their population. Their GNP is about on par with Finland and Denmark.
Texas12 Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 4:15 PM
Please explain to me why iran with its vast oil reserves needs nuclear power for energy generation.
RyanM Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 4:20 PM
Because they would rather sell the oil instead of burning it. Anyway, as a signer of the NPT it isn't anyone's business what they want to do regarding nuclear energy.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 4:20 PM
And this brings us to two grand concepts: 1) Standards of evidence, and 2) Standards of proof.

There is no EVIDENCE Iran has a nuclear weapons program.

There is no EVIDENCE (and certainly no proof) that Russia and China are selling ICBM's to Iran.

Since no one has reached the standard of evidence, then ipso facto no one has reached a standard of proof.

Now, before a nation commits to a war, in which trillions are spent, and thousands of irreplaceable young men and women die, it should insist on some very high standards of evidence and proof of clear and present danger.

None of these standards have been met (or even attempted to be met).
IsraelFirsterSecond Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 6:02 PM
There is no evidence of Israel having nukes either.
IsraelFirsterSecond Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 6:03 PM
No one even says Iran has a nuke.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 7:24 PM
Do learn to read more carefully: I said "Nuclear Weapons PROGRAM." Of course, Iran has NEITHER nukes nor a nuclear weapons program. Sheer war-baiting propaganda.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Aug 17, 2012 7:25 PM
I think Mordecai Vanunu would take a different position on that.

U.S. newspapers this fall will devote countless column inches and network TV will set aside endless hours to revisiting the most perilous month in the history of the republic, if not of the world.

Nikita Khrushchev's decision to secretly install nuclear-armed intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Cuba began to form in his mind sometime earlier, perhaps in April of 1961.

Then it was that the new young U.S. President John F. Kennedy put a brigade of Cubans ashore to become the vanguard of a guerrilla army to overthrow Fidel Castro's regime.

The Bay of Pigs...