« Iran making missiles that could hit Europe - say exiles | Main | The charm of the Iranian threat »

December 2, 2004

On Iran: It's Either War, Or The Bomb

Alright, I admit it. This Iran thing is bugging me. Today is fast beginning to look like 'rag-on-Iran' day. I can't help it though because Iran is a very serious problem that is not going to be resolved until we make perfectly clear to them, and mean it, that they stop their nuclear program now and do so in a manner that can be verified, with no "secret sites" out of bounds to inspectors, or, we are simply going to destroy all of the facilities, proven and suspected, now! Having already posted articles here, and here today, one of which is an extensive review of the Iran nuclear issue, I remembered a Nov 30 Ha'aretz article entitled "Either war, or the bomb." Here are a few excerpt from the article:

"There are three species of creatures who when they seem coming are going, when they seem going they come: diplomats, women, and crabs," said John Hay, secretary of state during Teddy Roosevelt's presidency. Women have been freed of this dated, chauvinistic stigma, and crabs never protested anyway. But as far as diplomats are concerned, it appears that Hay was frequently right...."

".... there is now an ongoing process to find a solution to the problem of Iran - the hottest problem on President Bush's desk. It appears that attempts are being made to extinguish the flames by means of a pile of reports, recommendations, and position papers...."

"..... Kenneth Pollack (author of "The Persian Puzzle," - Hyscience expl.) recently participated in a mock "war game," mounted by The Atlantic magazine, to examine various options available to the American president in Iran. The players concluded that there is no reasonable military option on the table at this time. They examined three alternatives, including various shows of force, destruction of the nuclear installations, and an all-out war to topple the current regime, a plan objected to by all five participants. They added that diplomats must be given a chance to work, whatever that means."

"....Pollack wrote an important book in favor of the war in Iraq just before the war began. Now, during a process in which the timing is similar but his conclusion is different, Pollack declares that war must not be waged against Iran. What should be done? Pollack suggests several solutions, but he understands that they (are - Hyscience insert) far from guarantee success. To summarize, it is not clear that the bomb can be stopped without paying an intolerable price..."

"...Senator Hillary Clinton, while in the presence of an Israeli guest, recently made a similar statement, with the addition of an explanation for the limited options: What is happening in Iraq prevents us from taking effective action in Iran. On the other hand, as one of the participants in the game, former chief UN weapons inspector David Kay said, "If you say there is no acceptable military option, then you end any possibility that there will be a non-nuclear Iran. If the Iranians believe they will not suffer any harm, they will go right ahead."

".......In the absence of a convenient, accessible alternative to use force, and in light of existing circumstances, President Bush is left with only two real options: To accept the existence of an Iranian bomb, or to wage an "unfortunate war" with imperfect opening conditions. Any other option presented in the next two months, any international diplomatic process, will be little more than an optical illusion: When it seems to be coming, it will be going."  Read the Rest of this important article in Ha'aretz (Israel)...

Posted by Hyscience at December 2, 2004 11:33 AM

• On Iran: It's Either War, Or The Bomb - Dec 02, 2004