RE: Nuclear Iran a bigger threat than ISIS
July 22, 2014 at 8:19 am
(This post was last modified: July 22, 2014 at 8:23 am by Thumpalumpacus.)
(July 21, 2014 at 9:24 am)mralstoner Wrote: As I said, it boils down to prudence v. risk taking. I'm sure many Iranians are thoroughly modern people oppressed by theocracy. But that doesn't mean there aren't 12th Imam lunatics there too. We can't all have personal experience in every country. We have to make a judgment based on 2nd-hand information. And I've heard enough about the Twelvers to err on the side of caution. I can't wait for Israel to act. Bring it on.
You're right, we must rely upon others for information much of the time. However, I'd suggest that the information you're gleaning from the US media is deliberately sensationalized. It certainly doesn't comport with my personal experiences with Iranian citizens, both when I lived there in my youth, and later, when interacting with Iranian visitors (my job brings me into much contact with tourists).
There are some lunatics in Iran, but they're not in positions to enforce their lunacy. The leadership, even the religious leadership, practices Realpolitik very carefully, and like most power elites, their goals are 1) national survival, and 2) retaining their hold on power. Using their lunatic fringe to justify attacking them is no different than justifying an attack on America because some fundamentalist Christians want to bring on the end-times.
Quote:And as far as I heard, Obama was/has eased the sanctions without neutering their nuclear program, merely delaying it while Iran fills its pockets with cash. Net result: Iran gets the cash, and later continues on with its nuke program (assuming it really is delaying it). Obama thinks he can negotiate with everyone: The Taliban, Putin, Muslim Brotherhood, China, Hamas, etc. Iran is just the same, they will play Obama for the fool he is.
Here's what I've read and heard on the radio:
Quote:VIENNA (AP) — The United Nations will release a report this week certifying that Iran's ability to make a nuclear bomb has been greatly reduced because it has diluted half of its material that can be turned most quickly into weapons-grade uranium, diplomats said Tuesday.
The move is part of Iran's commitments under a deal with six world powers in effect since January that mandates some nuclear concessions on the part of Tehran in exchange for a partial lifting of sanctions crippling its economy.
A key concern for the six was Iran's stockpile of 20-percent enriched uranium, which is only a technical step away from the 90-percent grade used to arm nuclear weapons. By late last year, Iran had already amassed almost enough of the 20-percent grade for one nuclear bomb, with further enrichment.
Under the agreement, Iran agreed to halt its 20-percent enrichment program and to turn half of its nearly 200-kilogram (440-pound) stockpile into oxide for reactor fuel. As well, it pledged to dilute the other half into low-enriched uranium.
Making weapons-grade uranium by reconverting from oxide or from the lower level would take much longer than doing so from the 20-percent enriched material, giving more time for the international community to react. Iran says it is not interested in nuclear weapons but is negotiating because it wants an end to all sanctions.
http://news.yahoo.com/ap-newsbreak-iran-...51010.html
That represents quite a significant step, and seems to support exactly what I was saying, that the government there is very concerned about reducing the sanctions, probably out of fear of domestic unrest. It was only five years ago that the mullahs nearly lost their grip on power, and they do not want a repetition.
The issues involved, and the Iranian people themselves, are quite a bit more sophisticated than the simple "kill-or-be-killed" scenario you've been handed.
Also, I'm absolutely against yet another aggressive war in the Middle East.
