(03-30-2015 03:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  1) Hamas - Iran has provided material support for Hamas. There's no defense of it from any significant geopolitical perspective. Perhaps Iranian action is simply to destabilize the Sunni majority PLO or prevent Gaza from becoming Saudi client state.

Ebb and flow. HAMAS serves its patrons' interests in addition to is own, and that patron has been Iraq, Iran, Qatar, Turkey as time goes on.

(03-30-2015 03:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 03:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Neither is our ally. Neither is going to stop looking for a nuclear bomb as a result of our action or inaction.

Then what is the point in negotiating if there is zero chance of stopping them?

This is a Diplomatic Dog and Pony Show to kick the can down the road in the name of a Legacy.

Just like the 90s Clinton deals with the NORKs this "Agreement" is worthless.

(03-30-2015 06:48 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 03:58 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 03:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Neither is our ally. Neither is going to stop looking for a nuclear bomb as a result of our action or inaction.

Then what is the point in negotiating if there is zero chance of stopping them?

This is a Diplomatic Dog and Pony Show to kick the can down the road in the name of a Legacy.

Just like the 90s Clinton deals with the NORKs this "Agreement" is worthless.

This. They should all dance and sing songs and charge admission. Nothing of substance - show only.

Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

(03-31-2015 06:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

Exactly.

Instead of trying to negotiate a treaty that will lack teeth and prove to be useless, I would take a different approach. The Owlnumbers Doctrine would state that if you have nuclear weapons, then any use or any attempted use or any allowing others to use those nuclear weapons against another country or party would be subject to being treated by the US as a nuclear attack on the US, and we would reserve the right to respond with the full force of our nuclear arsenal. Iran, you let Hezbollah get their hands on a dirty bomb and we vaporize Teheran and Isfahan.

(03-30-2015 03:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Actually look it from the Iranian perspective at the various pressure points. Not to defend Iran, but just look at how it might look to a nation that prides itself as the champion of Shia Islam. Here are the flash points from the likely IRANIAN point of view.

1) Iraq - Shia government in majority Shia nation under violent attack by Sunni extremists. There's a lot more to it than that, but that's how Iran is likely to view it first.

2) Syria - Same as Iraq, only difference is that Syria's government wasn't Shiite, but wasn't Sunni either.

3) Lebanon - Shiites are the largest group in Lebanon. They've were excluded from the elite until Iran's proxy army got involved.

4) The Gulf States - Shiites form a majority in many of these states but are discriminated against heavily by Sunni monarchies.

5) Saudi Arabia - Shiites are heavily discriminated against. Lots of very bad blood between them. Iranians blame Saudi policies for much of the anti-Shiite actions in the region.

6) Yemen - Shiite versus Sunni again.

-----

Here is where Iran operates outside of a Sunni - Shia framework.

1) Hamas - Iran has provided material support for Hamas. There's no defense of it from any significant geopolitical perspective. Perhaps Iranian action is simply to destabilize the Sunni majority PLO or prevent Gaza from becoming Saudi client state.

All the other stuff appears to be quite marginal and basically looking to undercut The Saudis and/or the Gulf States.

----

That whole region appears to me to be less of a Arab versus Israel than a Saudi Sunni versus Iranian Shia battleground. It is both. But its really a proxy war based upon religion. No point in tying ourselves down with one side IMHO.

Neither is our ally. Neither is going to stop looking for a nuclear bomb as a result of our action or inaction.

The US in under no obligation to look at things from the Iranian POV. They want what they want and that's fine. But trying to ascribe a Shia crusaderism slant to their efforts in the region is the same logic that Putin is using for his recent land grabs. Iran has done nothing to foster peace in that region and getting nuclear weapons is not going to change their international perspective of being irrational actors. They want to be Turkey but are going to end up being viewed along the sames lines as Pakistan.

(03-31-2015 06:13 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 06:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

Exactly.

Instead of trying to negotiate a treaty that will lack teeth and prove to be useless, I would take a different approach. The Owlnumbers Doctrine would state that if you have nuclear weapons, then any use or any attempted use or any allowing others to use those nuclear weapons against another country or party would be subject to being treated by the US as a nuclear attack on the US, and we would reserve the right to respond with the full force of our nuclear arsenal. Iran, you let Hezbollah get their hands on a dirty bomb and we vaporize Teheran and Isfahan.

As Ripley once said, 'it's the only why to be sure.'

(03-31-2015 06:13 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 06:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

Exactly.

Instead of trying to negotiate a treaty that will lack teeth and prove to be useless, I would take a different approach. The Owlnumbers Doctrine would state that if you have nuclear weapons, then any use or any attempted use or any allowing others to use those nuclear weapons against another country or party would be subject to being treated by the US as a nuclear attack on the US, and we would reserve the right to respond with the full force of our nuclear arsenal. Iran, you let Hezbollah get their hands on a dirty bomb and we vaporize Teheran and Isfahan.

Yep. If you are going to take on building of a nuclear arsenal, then there are responsibilities that come with it. They should be made very clear what those are.

(03-31-2015 06:13 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 06:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

Exactly.

Instead of trying to negotiate a treaty that will lack teeth and prove to be useless, I would take a different approach. The Owlnumbers Doctrine would state that if you have nuclear weapons, then any use or any attempted use or any allowing others to use those nuclear weapons against another country or party would be subject to being treated by the US as a nuclear attack on the US, and we would reserve the right to respond with the full force of our nuclear arsenal. Iran, you let Hezbollah get their hands on a dirty bomb and we vaporize Teheran and Isfahan.

Except, Iran knows we won't do that.

(03-31-2015 11:38 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 06:13 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 06:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

Exactly.

Instead of trying to negotiate a treaty that will lack teeth and prove to be useless, I would take a different approach. The Owlnumbers Doctrine would state that if you have nuclear weapons, then any use or any attempted use or any allowing others to use those nuclear weapons against another country or party would be subject to being treated by the US as a nuclear attack on the US, and we would reserve the right to respond with the full force of our nuclear arsenal. Iran, you let Hezbollah get their hands on a dirty bomb and we vaporize Teheran and Isfahan.

Except, Iran knows we won't do that.

probably SFT.

(03-31-2015 06:13 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 06:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

Exactly.

Instead of trying to negotiate a treaty that will lack teeth and prove to be useless, I would take a different approach. The Owlnumbers Doctrine would state that if you have nuclear weapons, then any use or any attempted use or any allowing others to use those nuclear weapons against another country or party would be subject to being treated by the US as a nuclear attack on the US, and we would reserve the right to respond with the full force of our nuclear arsenal. Iran, you let Hezbollah get their hands on a dirty bomb and we vaporize Teheran and Isfahan.

How do you expect such a doctrine to have teeth when, for 12 of the past 40 years, we have had presidents like Jimmy Carter or Barack Obama. We have reserved the right to retaliate against Syria for use of chemical weapons on its own people. That right is still reserved, and will remain so indefinitely.

In addition, I don't see how coming to an agreement now precludes the use of that doctrine. An agreement on its own may or may not be useless. Removing stockpiles from Iran is something very substantial. I doubt that you can prevent Iran from withholding enough material to make one or two bombs (knowing they risk the return of sanctions). But, the kind of measures that I've outlined probably preclude the development of a genuine arsenal. And, you can still nuke them if Hezbollah sets off a dirty bomb somewhere.

Isn't that part of the problem?

I seriously doubt that the Iranian Military would set off such a bomb... Instead they would more likely allow some fringe group to have access. If you think about it, this is how much of 'war' in the region is waged... not by men in uniform.

(03-31-2015 01:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Isn't that part of the problem?
I seriously doubt that the Iranian Military would set off such a bomb... Instead they would more likely allow some fringe group to have access. If you think about it, this is how much of 'war' in the region is waged... not by men in uniform.

The game changer here was 1973. When the Arabs found out that Israel had nukes, they lost interest in direct confrontation and began to use surrogates.

There is a long history of doing so in the region. In the land where "my brother and I will fight my cousin, my cousin and I will fight the world," the use of surrogates has all sorts of unhappy implications.

(03-31-2015 06:13 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-31-2015 06:07 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Iran will eventually be nuclear armed. I see nothing or anyone that is going to stop it. We will at that point have to deal with them in a different manner. That is why they are doing this. It is all about gaining respect in the region and in the world. They equate having this capability to power.

Exactly.

Instead of trying to negotiate a treaty that will lack teeth and prove to be useless, I would take a different approach. The Owlnumbers Doctrine would state that if you have nuclear weapons, then any use or any attempted use or any allowing others to use those nuclear weapons against another country or party would be subject to being treated by the US as a nuclear attack on the US, and we would reserve the right to respond with the full force of our nuclear arsenal. Iran, you let Hezbollah get their hands on a dirty bomb and we vaporize Teheran and Isfahan.

While I agree with you 100% you do realize this plays directly into the "Iranian Hidden Imam comes out of the Well during the Apocalypse" Theogy. The Iranians need a nuke to accelerate the coming of the Imam.

Detonating Nukes around the Middle East wouldn't just end with a strike and a counter-strike. I see at least four strikes.