A Fairer Iranian Options Thread

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Look, "containment" doesn't work, I tried to explain on the old one..

Fu** this...I'll change my vote -not only should we do a conventional airstrike, but also launch a full-scale military invasion and occupation of Iran.  And that should also involve reinstating the draft so we could have a deep reserve of readily-deployable manpower that we can throw at them.  If we are going to wipe out Iran's capability to develop nuclear weapons, it makes no sense to stop short with only an airstrike while the Iranian populace is clamoring for vengeance in its aftermath with terrorist cells being readied to wreak hell on the American homeland.  Let's fight the terrorists there rather than here.   

What do you suggest be done about the Iranian situation, Frodo?

It's easy to dismiss all the available options, but doing nothing will have a cost too, at some time in the future.

This is clearly a dangerous regime with great potential to bring destructive war to the region, and to the United States.  The countries around it are weak and will probably be intimidated enough to buckle to a nuclear-armed Iran.

Iran could use its nuclear weapons to intimidate the region into declaring economic warfare on the west by curtailing oil production and driving the price through the roof.

There are no easy answers to this problem, but I think we should be mindful of the potential costs of doing nothing.

Dazzleman -I see no reason why we can't simply contain Iran as we did the Soviet Union for over a half-century.  It is the least dangerous option out there, and though it is a dangerous regime, it nonetheless is a regime that values its own self-preservation.  They are rational beings.  Iran is not the equivalent of Al Qaeda which cannot be contained like any other nation-state and therefore must be hunted down with whatever means are at our disposal. 

Frodo, your point is valid and your mind is in the right place, but the reality of the situation doesn't allow for us to do the same thing this time. You have to remember we had the fact of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) to hold against the Soviets, they knew that America, if attacked, had the willpower and guts to wipe Communism off the map. This situation is completely different. Given the opportunity, the far right wing Islamic facists (that indeed exist) would take any uranium enriched or bought by the government and use it in such a way where it could do damage to this country. Imagine Los Angeles dissapearing one day? Now yes, it would be difficult for hardliners to come by this material, but surely not impossible. Knowing full well thier country would suffer nothing more than an American invasion, and with the whole-hearted view of martyrdom in thier minds, they would have no problem deploying such a weapon.

Meaning, do something about it now.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Tactical Aerial Assault on nuke sites and basic infrastructure.  By the time we're done, they will be begging for us to come to the table.

Yes, I'll point out that Iran has larger and more consentrated infrastructure, therefore it is a larger target, and unlike the Iraqis, they cannot function w/o power, water, and communication for very long.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Respond to my containment post? Frodo? Hello?

[The Man From G.O.P.]

What do you suggest be done about the Iranian situation, Frodo?

It's easy to dismiss all the available options, but doing nothing will have a cost too, at some time in the future.

This is clearly a dangerous regime with great potential to bring destructive war to the region, and to the United States.  The countries around it are weak and will probably be intimidated enough to buckle to a nuclear-armed Iran.

Iran could use its nuclear weapons to intimidate the region into declaring economic warfare on the west by curtailing oil production and driving the price through the roof.

There are no easy answers to this problem, but I think we should be mindful of the potential costs of doing nothing.

Dazzleman -I see no reason why we can't simply contain Iran as we did the Soviet Union for over a half-century.  It is the least dangerous option out there, and though it is a dangerous regime, it nonetheless is a regime that values its own self-preservation.  They are rational beings.  Iran is not the equivalent of Al Qaeda which cannot be contained like any other nation-state and therefore must be hunted down with whatever means are at our disposal. 

Frodo, your point is valid and your mind is in the right place, but the reality of the situation doesn't allow for us to do the same thing this time. You have to remember we had the fact of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) to hold against the Soviets, they knew that America, if attacked, had the willpower and guts to wipe Communism off the map. This situation is completely different. Given the opportunity, the far right wing Islamic facists (that indeed exist) would take any uranium enriched or bought by the government and use it in such a way where it could do damage to this country.

I don't buy it.  As I see it, the basis of the Islamist regime in Iran is its ability to protect the Iranian people from all threats, especially an American-led invasion -that, after all, is what this whole nuclear stand-off is all about as far as they are concerned.  If they set off a nuclear weapon in an American metropolis, they know full well that it will undermine Iran's national security (that they have so painstakingly tried to guarantee by creating a nuclear weapon in the first place) and the basis for their rule, and invite massive American nuclear retaliation that will leave Iran a nuclear wasteland. 

Face it, we are just going to have to agree to disagree on whether the powers that be in Iran are as rational as we think they are.       

They're not interested in protecting thier own people, they're interested in being all... Islamicky and they're willing to supress whoever disagrees, as unstable as they are, can you not imagine some of that fancy uranium they're coming by slipping into some crazy peoples hands?

[The Man From G.O.P.]

As I said, we are just going to have to agree to disagree on the rationality of the Iranian leadership.  Clearly, no amount of persuasion will make any difference on either one of us.  Therefore, as far as I am concerned, this argument is over.   

NO YOU'RE WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Anyone advocating an attack like this scenario?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I wish all the DU members were dead, I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore.