John Bolton: Iran and nukes -- time i...

John Bolton: Iran and nukes -- time is too short, and sanctions...

There are 8 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jul 5, 2009, titled John Bolton: Iran and nukes -- time is too short, and sanctions.... In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

With Iran's hard-line mullahs and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps unmistakably back in control, Israel's decision of whether to use military force against Tehran's nuclear weapons program is more urgent than ever.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

JimInWoodbury

Saint Paul, MN

#1 Jul 5, 2009
Bolton's argument is that Iran can't be trusted (true enough), we might have to bomb them someday to prevent them from completing a delivierable nuclear bomb (also possible), but then it falls apart when he says to bomb them now, so we should bomb them now rather than later

Apparently, according to Mr Bolton, either Isreal or the U.S. has the capability of destroying Iran's nuclear capability. If that is true, it would hold true a week from now, a month from now, years from now. In other words, until Iran can actually launch a working nuclear weapon, we lose nothing by trying alternatives.

We do not risk being "surprised" by iran either. Keep in mind that no nation, even with good scientists, engineers and a stockpile of fissible material, slaps together a working bomb without testing it. I think we might notice an exploding nuke.

The fact is there are moderate and even democratic members in Iran's religious classes. The hardliners n Iran have done more that lost credibility in the international community, they've lost a great deal of credibility within Iran. Something that Bolton no doubt is aware, but ignores. It may be years away, but Bolton unfairly disregards the possibility of change within Iran.

Attacking Iran would only encourage anti-west feelings and give the hardliners the support of the Iranian people. Having hardliners in control also makes the likelihood of a broader war in the region more likely. After the incredible sacrifices America has made to bring stability to Iraq, to now intentionally do something to destabalize the region is absurd.

No surpise that Bolton's logic is non-existant. He's never been too bright.
Jamie

Canberra, Australia

#2 Jul 5, 2009
Just bomb the whole bloody world while you are at it, you freaking nut cases.

You Americans are going nuts and will soon destroy this whole planet and we around the world are starting to get really very totally seriously sick of your freaking warmongering attitudes.

Why don't you people just f@#king mind your own business. Live and let live you freaking morons!!!
Monk

Minneapolis, MN

#3 Jul 5, 2009
JimInWoodbury wrote:
Bolton's argument is that Iran can't be trusted (true enough), we might have to bomb them someday to prevent them from completing a delivierable nuclear bomb (also possible), but then it falls apart when he says to bomb them now, so we should bomb them now rather than later
Apparently, according to Mr Bolton, either Isreal or the U.S. has the capability of destroying Iran's nuclear capability. If that is true, it would hold true a week from now, a month from now, years from now. In other words, until Iran can actually launch a working nuclear weapon, we lose nothing by trying alternatives.
We do not risk being "surprised" by iran either. Keep in mind that no nation, even with good scientists, engineers and a stockpile of fissible material, slaps together a working bomb without testing it. I think we might notice an exploding nuke.
The fact is there are moderate and even democratic members in Iran's religious classes. The hardliners n Iran have done more that lost credibility in the international community, they've lost a great deal of credibility within Iran. Something that Bolton no doubt is aware, but ignores. It may be years away, but Bolton unfairly disregards the possibility of change within Iran.
Attacking Iran would only encourage anti-west feelings and give the hardliners the support of the Iranian people. Having hardliners in control also makes the likelihood of a broader war in the region more likely. After the incredible sacrifices America has made to bring stability to Iraq, to now intentionally do something to destabalize the region is absurd.
No surpise that Bolton's logic is non-existant. He's never been too bright.
I agree with your comments. The Obama Administration just froze the assets of an Iranian company which does business with N Korea for possible arms or even nuclear
weapons. And they had already frozen Iranian assets in March-

U.S. Freezes Assets of 11 Alleged Front Companies for the Iranian Government.
FOXNews.com Tuesday, March 03, 2009
"The U.S. Treasury announced Tuesday that it is sanctioning 11 companies tied to Bank Melli, which the U.S. government has long held is a front operation of the Iranian government.
According to the Treasury, Bank Melli has been designated as a nuclear proliferator by the United States, the European Union and Australia."

Israel has detailed plans for bombing Iraq's nuclear weapons industry- IMO- because Israel has contingency
plans for everything.
We also have a strong military presence in the Gulf off the coast of Iran. We may also have plans to attack.

This statement by Bolton is laughable-
"Significantly, the uprising in Iran also makes it more likely that an effective public diplomacy campaign could be waged in the country to explain to Iranians that such an attack is directed against the regime, not against the Iranian people."

A PR campaign in Iran? To explain why we bombed their country? That would ensure the clerics regime for at least 30 more years. Bolton must be short on cash and looking
for a paycheck for his lame opinions.
With world opinion, including Russia and China, against
any new nations developing nukes, time is on our side.

“Sustainability Now!”

Since: May 08

Vadnais Heights

#4 Jul 5, 2009
Jamie wrote:
Just bomb the whole bloody world while you are at it, you freaking nut cases.
You Americans are going nuts and will soon destroy this whole planet and we around the world are starting to get really very totally seriously sick of your freaking warmongering attitudes.
Why don't you people just f@#king mind your own business. Live and let live you freaking morons!!!
I totally understand your frustration after reading this diatribe from Bolton. The Good News -- he is no longer a part of the US Government, simply a scribbler for the American Enterprise Institute -- a hypo-con "think tank."

The American people decisively performed Regime Change last November, and wingnuts like Bolton were shown the door. Let's hope that John stays in the shallow end of the pool!
Monk

Minneapolis, MN

#5 Jul 5, 2009
Jamie wrote:
Just bomb the whole bloody world while you are at it, you freaking nut cases.
You Americans are going nuts and will soon destroy this whole planet and we around the world are starting to get really very totally seriously sick of your freaking warmongering attitudes.
Why don't you people just f@#king mind your own business. Live and let live you freaking morons!!!
You don't even know what your own government thinks-

"The U.S. Treasury announced Tuesday that it is sanctioning 11 companies tied to Bank Melli, which the U.S. government has long held is a front operation of the Iranian government.
According to the Treasury, Bank Melli has been designated as a nuclear proliferator by the United States, the European Union and Australia."

Austrawlia agrees with the US on the danger of Iran getting nukes. So what's your point?
Jamie

Canberra, Australia

#6 Jul 5, 2009
Monk wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't even know what your own government thinks-
"The U.S. Treasury announced Tuesday that it is sanctioning 11 companies tied to Bank Melli, which the U.S. government has long held is a front operation of the Iranian government.
According to the Treasury, Bank Melli has been designated as a nuclear proliferator by the United States, the European Union and Australia."
Austrawlia agrees with the US on the danger of Iran getting nukes. So what's your point?
Whats my point??? pfffff, drop it man. If you can't get my point, then you are seriously ...pfffff

Ok ok, before i go, my point is "I am sick and tired of all this" Thats all, i am not starting any debates, nor am i making any point in fact, am just fed up with America policing the world like this. Haven't we seen enough ???? I think i have, maybe you guys who live inside America sees nothing of the outside world.... YEAH thats it, you people see nothing except for what your politicians wants you to see. Ahh well, bye bye and good luck bombing the world... Next is Iran, then maybe north Korea, then ... hmmm, you people are at war with everyone .... well, except those you subverted.
Monk

Minneapolis, MN

#7 Jul 5, 2009
Jamie wrote:
<quoted text>
Whats my point??? pfffff, drop it man. If you can't get my point, then you are seriously ...pfffff
Ok ok, before i go, my point is "I am sick and tired of all this" Thats all, i am not starting any debates, nor am i making any point in fact, am just fed up with America policing the world like this. Haven't we seen enough ???? I think i have, maybe you guys who live inside America sees nothing of the outside world.... YEAH thats it, you people see nothing except for what your politicians wants you to see. Ahh well, bye bye and good luck bombing the world... Next is Iran, then maybe north Korea, then ... hmmm, you people are at war with everyone .... well, except those you subverted.
How is US policy so different from your own country?
The US doesn't act alone. Why do you make it sound like
the US against the world?
Your own country was part of the invasion of Afghanistan
in 2001. And the Australian Defense Force is stationed
overseas-

"In addition to the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the ADF also maintains three small contributions to peacekeeping operations in the Middle East and Africa. As of March 2009 a total of 37 ADF personnel are deployed along the borders of Israel, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan as part of Operation Mazurka and Operation Paladin. A further 15 personnel form part of the United Nations Mission in Sudan and eight are deployed to support the United Nations and African Union Mission in Darfur. These operations began in 1982, 1956 and 2005 respectively."

You're no neutral non-military nation. You are part of UN sanctions against Iran and N Korea. That's all I'm saying.

“Not enough comets”

Since: Sep 07

Fort Lauderdale

#8 Jul 6, 2009
Between the Joint Chiefs and Joe Biden's comments, it would appear that Iran is being advised of imminent action. It's a little late but we have to suffer through Obama's re-election campaign.

If the current group of high rollers including Amadinejad, the Feuding Clerics and the Revolutionary Guard thought there was no threshold too high for the US, they are imagining themselves in the film treatment of "Awaken Persia" and facing the reality of total loss of their tarriff.

If Israel strikes, which would have to be this summer, Iran's shaky coalition loses control of the fragile civil leadership and its wobbling theocracy.

Not in their best interest to provoke or invite a strike. Their only friend is Obama plastered from head to foot in Chinese debt and a limping economy.

If they comply with nuclear inspectors and actually dismantle some or all of their enrichment apparatus, highly unlikely, the same government loses the Revolutionary Guard's support base that it balances on. Not likely.

If they tough it out and stand toe to toe with Israel, even flippity floppity Obama won't back down from our military commitment to Israel and risk losing our only reliable outpost in the Middle East. The Saudis CAN be bought.

We have blown Iraq as a base which will soon revert to a Shiite madhouse with every wannabe in a turban angling for its oil wealth. The only possible defense would have been a strong NATO response from Turkey. Not to Michelle's liking.

China has not yet weighed in but as Iran's biggest oil customer, it won't go to war for Iran but will press for a stabilized regime through a brokered deal with the US sidelining Israel.

The Mullahs should go. Amadinejad must go. The Revolutionary Guard should go. Every other Arab state in the region agrees with this. But none of the above plan to go anywhere which means that a prominent head will roll, probably Amadinejad's.

As far as the US being somehow responsible to American Idol call-ins from Australia and Pet Supermarket, this is our country's survival we're talking about, not a congeniality contest.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Arak, Iran Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Significant obstacles lie ahead for nuclear tal... (Jun '15) Aug '15 hirstest 3
News In Iran nuclear talks, discord on inspecting un... (Jun '15) Jun '15 Jeff Brightone 1
News U.S., Iran reach historic nuclear frameworka (Apr '15) Apr '15 cancer lost 4
News Iran's top leader says no nuclear deal better t... (Feb '15) Feb '15 Mag 1
News Iran's NPT Withdrawal Option (Jan '15) Jan '15 Oli 1
News an Iranian Opposition Group's Fight for Freedom (Dec '14) Dec '14 Rudi 1
News UN diplomats: Report says Iran buying for reactor (Dec '14) Dec '14 The Sun 1
More from around the web