Diplomacy the best way to handle Iran

Diplomacy the best way to handle Iran

There are 6 comments on the South China Morning Post story from Jan 13, 2012, titled Diplomacy the best way to handle Iran. In it, South China Morning Post reports that:

No right-thinking government can oppose efforts to ensure that Iran does not develop nuclear weapons.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at South China Morning Post.

True

Mooresville, IN

#1 Jan 14, 2012
Diplomacy is always a better alternative to bloodshed.
USA USA USA USA USA USA

Blacklick, OH

#2 Jan 14, 2012
Diplomacy will simply delay the inevitable ass-kicking coming Iran's way.

Since: Apr 10

USA

#3 Jan 14, 2012
USA USA USA USA USA USA wrote:
Diplomacy will simply delay the inevitable ass-kicking coming Iran's way.
I concur with you there.

Either a war will happen or the world will have to live with what Iran is doing.

Since: Mar 08

Mission Viejo, CA

#4 Jan 14, 2012
In the same story, the New York Times quotes US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta making what should be a startling admission: that Iran does not have a nuclear weapons programme.

Panetta says:“Are they [Iran] trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No.”

That Panetta finally admits what many people around the world know to be true, including American intelligence agencies in at least two US National Intelligence Estimates in 2007 and 2010 – that is, that Iran is not attempting to develop a nuclear weapon, should be a front-page headline. Especially when taken together with General Dempsey’s disclosure that war plans are afoot. From its own admission, therefore, the US government is pushing the world into possibly a World War III scenario on the basis of a totally spurious claim that even its own top brass do not believe.

Reflecting the bankruptcy that has corroded the US political establishment is the way that the New York Times – America’s self-styled premier newspaper – glides over these nuggets of self-indictment as if they were worthless banalities.

So if Iran is not even trying to develop a nuclear weapon, as Panetta now admits, what then is the criminal US warmongering predicated on?

Unofficially, the real reason is imperialist rivalry with other powers (Russia and China in particular) in the energy-rich Persian Gulf and Central Asia regions, and the attempt to engineer “regime change” in Iran to one that is pliant with Washington’s geopolitical designs.

Officially, for what it is worth, it seems now that the US is not happy even with the mere suspicion that Iran maybe, just maybe, might one day capable of developing nuclear capability.

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php...

Since: Mar 08

Mission Viejo, CA

#5 Jan 14, 2012
Iran: The Neocons Are At It Again
by Ralph Nader

The same neocons who persuaded George W. Bush and crew to, in Ron Paul's inimitable words, "lie their way into invading Iraq" in 2003, are beating the drums of war more loudly these days to attack Iran. It is remarkable how many of these war-mongers are former draft dodgers who wanted other Americans to fight the war in Vietnam.

With the exception of Ron Paul, who actually knows the history of U.S.-Iranian relations, the Republican presidential contenders have declared their belligerency toward Iranian officials who they accuse of moving toward nuclear weapons.

The Iranian regime disputes that charge, claiming they are developing the technology for nuclear power and nuclear medicine.

The inspection teams of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) that monitor compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Iran belongs, have entered Iran numerous times and, while remaining suspicious, have not been able to find that country on the direct road to the Bomb.

While many western and some Arab countries in the Gulf region have condemned Iran's alleged nuclear arms quest, Israel maintains some 200 ready nuclear weapons and has refused to sign the non-proliferation treaty, thereby avoiding the IAEA inspectors.

Israelis in the know have much to say. Defense minister, Ehud Barak, responded to PBS's Charlie Rose's question "If you were Iran wouldn't you want a nuclear weapon?" with these words:

"Probably, probably. I don't delude myself that they are doing it just because of Israel. They have their history of 4,000 years. They look around and they see the Indians are nuclear. The Chinese are nuclear, Pakistan is nuclear as well as North Korea, not to mention the Russians."

...

http://globalresearch.ca/index.php...
old china

Chengdu, China

#6 Jan 14, 2012
True wrote:
Diplomacy is always a better alternative to bloodshed.
If Iran is developing nuclear weapons then you need to ask yourself what other country(s) have instilled sufficient fear in them to prompt this.

Perhaps we should remove the cause of their fear, not instil more?

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.

Xi Jinping Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The hidden risks of opening up trade with China Oct 14 Go Back to the Sk... 3
News At the G-20, Trump is not the only strongman th... Jul '17 USA Today 1
News South Korea Mocks Trump's 'Ignorant Remarks' (Apr '17) Apr '17 No Future 2
News Upcoming U.S.-China summit at Mar-a-Lago burnis... (Apr '17) Apr '17 Ms Sassy 21
News With so much at stake, Southern California clos... (Apr '17) Apr '17 ThomasA 2
News Chinaa s Xi to meet Trump in Mar-a-Lago on Apri... (Mar '17) Mar '17 CodeTalker 1
News Trump reaffirms 'one China' policy in call with... (Feb '17) Feb '17 James 2
More from around the web