High-stakes showdown looms on Iran

[jasmeel]

Later this week Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the
International Atomic Energy Agency, is expected to report to the agency's board of governors that
Iran has failed to heed demands to halt its uranium-conversion activities.

That will set the table for a week or two of intense diplomatic poker in which the U.S. and its main European allies will attempt to bluff Iran into abandoning efforts to build a nuclear bomb. Though the stakes are high--some experts believe Iran is within two years of building a nuclear bomb--none of the key players is holding a particularly strong hand.

The U.S. position has been seriously weakened by the war in
Iraq. Earlier this month
President Bush said he had not ruled out the use of force against Iran, but the Iraq war has put a severe strain on U.S. military resources, and it is doubtful there would be much public or political support for extending the fight into Iran.

Record-high oil prices also have undermined the U.S. bargaining position. Given America's dependency on Middle East oil, analysts believe the Bush administration would not be eager to risk further price hikes by embarking on another military campaign in the region.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/chitribts/20050828/ts_chicagotrib/highstakesshowdownloomsoniran

[FightingIrish]

1. It makes you wonder if the Bush administratrion had not

blundered so badly in Iraq we might be in Iran right now. Maybe there is an upside to incompetence.

[jasmeel]

2. I don't see them letting anything get in their way- not even

failure. They know NOW is the time to act. They've already squandered their popularity and are desparate to get what they can.

[okieinpain]

4. possible, but if they push to the extreme they will start to lose

repugs. a war with iran would have to be one of the most brilliant military campaigns every fought in the history of mankind for it not to blow up in bush's face.

it would have to be over in 2-3 weeks, and that is just not going to happen. gas prices would be close to 10 a gallon by the end of that 3rd week, and if the war lasted longer, the sky is the limit on gas prices.

to me anything over 6-7 dollars a gallon would totally wreck the fragile american economy, taking the rest of the economies with it except for perhaps china.


ha, now wouldn't that be something.

[Deja Q]

5. Would repugs impeach * out or vote for someone similar?

Likely.

Stay tuned.

[Jackpine Radical]

13. Remember that neocons believe in Magic Mushrooms.

Mushroom clouds, that is. If gthey deluded themselves so totally about Iraq, you gotta bet they'll do it again in Iran. "Jeez, fellas--a couple of nukes & it's all over. We can just march in."

Anybody familiar with the old Festinger social psych classic "When Prophecy Fails" can imagine exactly what I'm talking about.

The failure of the Iraq prophecy drives them even further into the delusional system and into the bleief that THIS time it'll all come out right.

[wli]

3. war with Iran is war with China, Russia, and the rest of the SCO

Bushler's idiocy is worse than Hitler's suicidal invasion of Russia in winter.

[CHIMO]

6. Iran

Has plans as well.

Iran seeks to broaden nuclear talks

Iran does not consider Britain, France and Germany to be the sole negotiating partners on its nuclear programme and believes the process should be opened out beyond Europe, the Foreign Ministry said.

"We will continue negotiating with them, but on the other hand we will not restrict our negotiations to being with just these three countries," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said on Sunday, referring to the so-called EU-3.

Britain, France and Germany have been engaged in close to two years of tough talks with the Islamic republic, but Asefi said that Iran has also been talking with countries such as Japan, Malaysia and South Africa.

"We want to have negotiations with other countries. It is up to the Europeans not to remove themselves from the negotiations," he said, accusing the EU-3 of refusing to recognise Iran's right to the nuclear fuel cycle.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/1A9D9F26-CDA3-4606-B4AF-08C959C95C58.htm

[Kelvin Mace]

7. An attack on Iran

would result in massive U.S. casualties unless nuclear weapons were used. The use of nuclear weapons would be universally condemned in the rest of the world (even Blair). Embargoes would be placed against American goods, military bases would be shut down, ports and airspace would be closes to U.S. military trafic. Their is a good chance the U.S. would expelled from NATO. EU nuclear weapons would then be targeted on the U.S.

A conventional attack would be subject to a devastating counter-attack which would involve our ground forces being badly outnumbered.

Any military attack on Iran or Syria would be suicidal.

[bemildred]

8. Iran: "I fart in your general direction".

Three years ago they might have made a deal. After the Bushite debacles in Afghanistan and Iraq, they will do what they like.

[The_Casual_Observer]

9. bush to Iran ( the practical pig), I'll huff and I'll puff and blooooow

your house down!

[VegasWolf]

10. Honest, honest, I'll huff and puff!!! nt

[VegasWolf]

11. Iran, I will call you a stinky doo-doo!!! nt

[tom_paine]

12. The sad truth is that Iran now MUST build nuclear weapons

It is the ONLY thing which can save them from the Amerikan Empire's ambitions.

Syria is OK (maybe) because they have no oil. But I would be amazing if every oil-producing nationw asn;t moving as rapidly as possible to acquire nukes now.

God Help Us, the Busheviks have made a situation where it is 100% correct for them to do so.

[Jackpine Radical]

14. Yes, you're exactly right.