Comments on: IRAN DECLARES WAR: MEDIA YAWNS

By: qwlysdsvo

qwlysdsvo — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 05:49:07 +0000

khxrzsbk

ctllghticg ffqmhdxty xliispegmxo useypahmcty

By: Media Lies

Media Lies — Sat, 13 May 2006 03:10:24 +0000

According to some bloggers….

….Iran has declared war on the US. Read the details and make up your own mind.

UPDATE: Some

By: A Blog For All

A Blog For All — Sat, 13 May 2006 01:47:10 +0000

Iran Has That Hi-Pro Glow To It

Peaceful purposes huh? That glow that Ahmadinejad may have been seeing was his nuclear weapons scientists getting ever closer to obtaining enough enriched uranium to build nuclear weapons.

By: Freedom Fighter

Freedom Fighter — Fri, 12 May 2006 23:58:10 +0000

Ahmadinejad’s letter was an invitation to Bush to Dawa..to accept Islam peacefully. In terms of preperation an Islamic caliphate jihad, this is EXACTLY the proper protocol. As for Iran’s nukes, read this:J O S H U A P U N D I T: The nuclear project Ahmadinejad didn’t brag about

If the mullahs don’t already have nukes, purloined from the unaccounted for Ukrainian arsenal, they will have them in three years tops once the hidden site at Neyshabour goes online in 2007.

Bush had better begin to figure out how he’s planning on handling this.

And certain people with a small `d’ after their names had better wake up to the fact we’re in an existential war.

By: Nicholas

Nicholas — Fri, 12 May 2006 22:17:53 +0000

I find your insights…well, insightful. I’ve yet to encounter such a take on the letter. Most of the rhetoric from Washington simply dismisses the letter on the basis that it’s unrelated to nuclear proliferations. But critics are saying that the letter was meant as an outstretched hand to Bush. They share a common faith. Islam and Christianity believe in the same God. “Allah,” as I’m sure everyone knows, is Arabic for “God.” They share the same prophets and creation myth, as well.
What to look out for, however, is Russia’s counter to Cheney’s accusations that Putin takes away civil liberties. Putin declared this week that he will increase military spending in an effort to keep up with the U.S. in case of a conflict. Remember that the U.S. armed Iran in the late 1940s to stop Russia from moving south and threatening the west’s stronghold in the Middle East. But Russia has continually opposed British and U.S. presence in the MIddle East (see Iraq war). Also consider that the U.S. armed Osama bin Laden and the Afghanistan Taliban to keep Russia out, which was a success. These are troubling times, to be cliched, and a Iran is not as far from gaining allies as the U.S. claims.

By: Tano

Tano — Fri, 12 May 2006 19:33:47 +0000

YAWN

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 12 May 2006 19:05:09 +0000

It’s really hard to tell how seriously we should take the rhetoric. Part of the problem isn’t just individuals, like Ahmadinejad, but deciphering the thinking and decision-making processes of closed regimes like Iran’s. I don’t think the Iranian’s are fully aware of how seriously we take this issue. I don’t think they’re as insular and self-deluding as Saddam was (if you haven’t read anything from the IPP yet, please do - the latest issue of Foreign Affairs has a great article), but it’s certainly possible they think their hand is stronger than it actually is. I think they’re emboldened by Iraq and feel relatively safe from attack.

This is one reason I support some direct talks with them, even if it’s behind the scenes. We need to make sure they are aware of how seriously we take this situation, and the consequences they’ll face if they continue with a weapons program. I’m not necessarily advocating threats since threats often have the opposite effect of their intent. Iran cannot be swayed by threats alone.

The nuclear program is very popular in Iran and would continue regardless of who is in power. There isn’t much we can do to stop it, as they do have a right to enrich uranium for nuclear fuel. But we can make it clear that they’d better play ball with inspections and tough preventative measures on weaponization.

Overall, I’m not hopeful on keeping nukes out of Iranian hands. Eventually, if they have the will, they will acquire them. There aren’t any good options at this point, which sucks.

By: Rick Moran

Rick Moran — Fri, 12 May 2006 17:58:27 +0000

I hope to hell you’re right. And I agree that the possibility that they’ve achieved that level of expertise is remote.

But we still don’t know everything Khan was selling in his bazarr. Might he have been able to slip a few kilos of weapons grade uranium into Iran? Since he won’t talk to us anymore, we might not ever know. But I can’t be the only one perplexed by this fellow Ahmadinejad. He seems so brazen in his threats, so matter of fact about them. Is he really bluffing?

By: Andy

Andy — Fri, 12 May 2006 17:52:51 +0000

We’ll be able to tell if the Uranium is Pakistani or not. I suspect that it is. The possibility that Iran already has HEU is pretty remote. They’ve only had the centrifuge technology for a couple of years (from the AQ Khan network), and they are still working through many of the engineering problems associated with building large cascades. Even their 164 centrifuge cascade experienced a crash.

We’ll wait and see what the tests reveal, however.