Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

West resigns itself to a nuclear Iran (Barf Alert)
Scotsman.com ^ | Sun 15 Jan 2006 | IAN MATHER

Posted on 01/14/2006 7:22:28 PM PST by indcons

WESTERN governments face defeat in their attempts to stop Iran from pursuing its drive to become a nuclear power.

Officials in London and Washington now privately admit that they must face the painful fact that there is nothing they can do, despite deep suspicions that Tehran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons under cover of researching nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

Yesterday a defiant Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country would not be deflected from its right to develop nuclear technology by referral to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.

"If they want to destroy the Iranian nation's rights by that course, they will not succeed," he said, adding that Tehran did not need nuclear weapons because they are only used by nations who "want to solve everything through the use of force".

Publicly, the US and Britain, the two countries that have adopted the most hawkish stance, are pressing for international action to stop Iran. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said last week that it was time for the UN to confront Iran's "defiance" over its nuclear programme, while British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw insisted that sanctions were now "on the table".

But behind the scenes there is no stomach for a fight. The US is the only country that could take military action. But with the US military already seriously overstretched in Iraq and with the mid-term congressional elections approaching there is no impetus in the White House or in Congress for another military adventure.

"Iran would be a far tougher country to try to attack than Iraq. It is three times as big and has highly motivated armed forces," a Foreign Office diplomat said yesterday.

(Excerpt) Read more at scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iran; irannukes; middleeast; proliferation; surrender
The world cannot sit silent as another muslim country goes nuclear......
1 posted on 01/14/2006 7:22:30 PM PST by indcons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: indcons

M.A.D. only works when the enemy isn't actually mad.

Iran will see to it that someone uses their weapons,
just as soon as they come off the assembly line.

We need to down the power lines to those lines now,
and keep them down.

Tehran doubtless knows that Tel Aviv has a Masada
Contingency, which is the vaporizing of all key
islamic coordinates if Israel is ever nuked. The
beardbrains in Tehran know it, and don't care.


2 posted on 01/14/2006 7:27:04 PM PST by Boundless (M.A.D. Mutually Assured Destruction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons
The US is the only country that could take military action.

Really? Not a single other country in the world has the capability of launching airstrikes that might at least slow down Iranian nuclear ambitions?

3 posted on 01/14/2006 7:28:16 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons

And when they do use Nukes the world will cry and mourn the fact that there was a time when the Iranians could have been defeated, but no one wanted to stop them until they used there weapons.


4 posted on 01/14/2006 7:30:37 PM PST by Duke Wayne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons

This journalist is way ahead of the curve. He's given up before hostilities even started.


5 posted on 01/14/2006 7:32:37 PM PST by Nachoman (Optimism is a gift - cynicism is earned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

Quite a few countries have the capabilities....however, very few have the will to take on the mad mullahs.


6 posted on 01/14/2006 7:34:09 PM PST by indcons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Boundless

Excellent points all.....I agree entirely.


7 posted on 01/14/2006 7:34:49 PM PST by indcons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Duke Wayne
And when they do use Nukes the world will blame the U.S. for not doing something about it.
8 posted on 01/14/2006 7:38:14 PM PST by teenyelliott (Soylent green should be made outta liberals...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: indcons
"Officials in London and Washington now privately admit that they must face the painful fact that there is nothing they can do"

My goodness, everyone wants to quote Murtha in their stories now.

9 posted on 01/14/2006 7:39:11 PM PST by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons
there is nothing they can do [the Americans and Brits]

Hahahaha! That is funny.

10 posted on 01/14/2006 7:39:14 PM PST by teenyelliott (Soylent green should be made outta liberals...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons

There is no way on this earth that Israel is going to let it happen....PERIOD


11 posted on 01/14/2006 7:40:54 PM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: indcons
But behind the scenes there is no stomach for a fight. The US is the only country that could take military action. But with the US military already seriously overstretched in Iraq and with the mid-term congressional elections approaching there is no impetus in the White House or in Congress for another military adventure.

"Iran would be a far tougher country to try to attack than Iraq. It is three times as big and has highly motivated armed forces," a Foreign Office diplomat said yesterday.

"Highly motivated armed forces" -- yes, we heard that with Iraq too. There are many sides to Iran. They are used to rule by the nutcase, zealot or loony-emperor of the day. That does not make for high-security in any installation.

And Iran does not have to be attacked so much as imploded.

12 posted on 01/14/2006 7:41:42 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOP_Party_Animal
"Officials in London and Washington now privately admit that they must face the painful fact that there is nothing they can do"

LMAO It's a toss-up who wrote this, Murtha or Ma Fifteen Minutes of Fame from Texas.

13 posted on 01/14/2006 7:48:25 PM PST by DoughtyOne (01/11/06: Ted Kennedy becomes the designated driver and moral spokesperson for the Democrat party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Nachoman


Cuz he's French Canadian...


14 posted on 01/14/2006 7:49:37 PM PST by in hoc signo vinces ("Houston, TX...a waiting quagmire for jihadis.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: indcons
Another "surrender at all costs" article.

"Iran would be a far tougher country to try to attack than Iraq. It is three times as big and has highly motivated armed forces," a Foreign Office diplomat said yesterday.

The West, particularly the US, can take Iran down anytime it wants to. "Diplomats" have never understood solutions, let alone military solutions. At best they just perpetuate the unacceptable until it becomes a matter only the military can resolve.

15 posted on 01/14/2006 7:58:18 PM PST by DakotaGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons

I will go and do it myself, how hard could it be.
Seriously.


16 posted on 01/14/2006 7:59:27 PM PST by Roverman2K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons

We resigned ourselves to a nuclear Russia, China, France, etc....why not a Muslim nation?


17 posted on 01/14/2006 8:03:56 PM PST by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachoman

...Frenchmen in the family woodpile maybe???


18 posted on 01/14/2006 8:04:25 PM PST by cavtrooper21 (No snappy tagline ideas available at this time... Please try again later.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: indcons

Good post. A sober assessment in my opinion. No one in the world would have the balls to attack Iran except GWB, and the Congress would crucify him if he did it on his own.

No way is Congress going to go along with a preemptive strike for a hundred reasons (cowardice chief among them).

Good to see you!

Atilla


19 posted on 01/14/2006 8:21:32 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
One thing the Democrats have accomplished with their all-out assault on the use of force by the U.S....is that Iran will only be stopped or destroyed after they have used nuclear weapons.

They insist on splitting this nation, and have succeeded in doing so, leaving the half that sees the situation clearly with not enough political capital left to do much other than let their "Imagine"/Star Trek/Gandhi utopian pacifist vision fail as completely as Chamberlain failed 70 years ago.

This is the legacy of the 60's generation...the generation that now has the power to influence the actions of this nation.

We're not at the end of the world. But you can see it from here.

20 posted on 01/14/2006 8:35:19 PM PST by Scott from the Left Coast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Scott from the Left Coast
is that Iran will only be stopped or destroyed after they have used nuclear weapons.

I don't like it, don't want it to be that way, but I have to agree with you.

21 posted on 01/14/2006 8:39:22 PM PST by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: DakotaGator
"Iran would be a far tougher country to try to attack than Iraq...."

Yeah, and Afghanistan was the country that resisted every empire from the British to the Soviets, and Baghdad would require hand-to-hand street combat to take, and everywhere a Marine stands is a "quagmire", and....

22 posted on 01/14/2006 8:39:24 PM PST by randog (What the....?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: indcons

Do I smell a Israeli-US War Coalition in this post?


23 posted on 01/14/2006 8:39:38 PM PST by Petey139
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

I agree with your thoughts, FRiend. Good to see to again too.


24 posted on 01/14/2006 8:39:48 PM PST by indcons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
We resigned ourselves to a nuclear Russia, China, France, etc....why not a Muslim nation?

This CANNOT be a seriously, rational question. Simply can't be.
25 posted on 01/14/2006 8:42:48 PM PST by gipper81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #26 Removed by Moderator

To: indcons

Thank China,Russia,N Korea,Norway,Romania,India,Pakistan,Germany,the UK,Canada and the USA who makes it all possible.

imo


27 posted on 01/14/2006 8:55:13 PM PST by joesnuffy (A camel once bit our sister.. but we knew what to do.. we gathered rocks and squashed her!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6
There is no way on this earth that Israel is going to let it happen....PERIOD

If they wait too long to act, they will.

28 posted on 01/14/2006 8:57:09 PM PST by airborne (If being a Christian was a crime, would there be enough evidence to convict you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: indcons
The world could not sit by while Germany rearmed. The world could not sit by while Japan seized Manchuria and raped Nanking. The world could not sit by while India was torn in half in massive religious pogroms. The world could not sit by while commie traitors gave nukes to Joe Stalin. The world could not sit by while commies took over China. The world could not sit by while democratic movements in eastern europe were crushed by tanks. The world could not sit by while millions were sent to re-education camps and killing fields in southeast Asia. The world could not sit by while scores of engineered terror-famines swept Africa. The world could not sit by while Rwanda was slaughtered.

Apparently, the world has a greater ability to sit by than the commentators suppose.

29 posted on 01/14/2006 9:02:43 PM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
It is not a nation, it is a nutjob crazier than Hitler who will start a nuclear war by destroying Tel Aviv, the instant he physically can.
30 posted on 01/14/2006 9:04:53 PM PST by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: randog

Ahhh...I see you've identified the coward's mantra.

We need to continue to expose their sniveling and whining until they crawl back under their covers and whimper through the night while real defenders of freedom make the world safe for them.

Mind you, I have no strong opinions on the subject ;-)


31 posted on 01/14/2006 9:32:01 PM PST by DakotaGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: gipper81

Before there were godless Muslims that wanted to kill us, there were godless commies...with nukes.


32 posted on 01/14/2006 9:32:43 PM PST by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: indcons
But with the US military already seriously overstretched in Iraq

Last I checked, Iraq wasn't far from Iran.

33 posted on 01/14/2006 9:35:23 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Before there were godless Muslims that wanted to kill us, there were godless commies...with nukes.

That's about right Einstein.

The Muslims reached New York City. Remember?
34 posted on 01/14/2006 9:47:57 PM PST by gipper81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: gipper81

That is corect, and they didn't have ICBMs. So how come we resigned ourselves to the bad guys with nuke delivery systems?


35 posted on 01/14/2006 10:00:26 PM PST by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Here is the flaw in your analysis. As evil as the Communists are, we still have one thing in common...we both want to live. This provides a firm basis for negotiations.

Muslims only want to kill and die for Allah. There is no rational entity within the Muslim sphere with whom we can negotiate in good faith.

They must never be permitted to develop nuclear weapons. They will use them.

36 posted on 01/14/2006 10:34:54 PM PST by 10mm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: indcons

Here's another Barf Alert on the same topic. Must be talking points...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1558393/posts


37 posted on 01/15/2006 2:05:14 AM PST by endthematrix (None dare call it ISLAMOFACISM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
"resigned ourselves"

Uh, those nuclear devices are meant for our destruction. The Soviets and China killed how many people via nuclear blackmail? Past nuclear proliferation were Rat foreign policy failures we would be foolish to repeat.

38 posted on 01/15/2006 2:17:06 AM PST by endthematrix (None dare call it ISLAMOFACISM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 10mm

There is no analysis, I just asked a question.


39 posted on 01/15/2006 3:41:53 AM PST by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: indcons

The Scotsman gets it wrong. Again.


40 posted on 01/15/2006 6:54:51 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons

On cable TV the other night: The Heroes, an incredible, mindboggling account of three special ops officers, army and airmen, whose actions at the beginning of the war in Afghanistan made all the difference. Three men leading a handful of troops, and pin point accurate bombing from F-15's. Who says we haven't already 'painted' Iran's nuclear sites? We know special ops guys went into Iran long ago, and they haven't been sitting on their hands.


41 posted on 01/15/2006 7:00:35 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons
The US is the only country that could take military action.

Apparantly, Israel doesn't rate.

But with the US military already seriously overstretched in Iraq

(Quagmire)

and with the mid-term congressional elections approaching there is no impetus in the White House or in Congress for another military adventure.

Yep, it's all one big Peter Pan adventure...

"Iran would be a far tougher country to try to attack than Iraq.

True, for Scotland...

It is three times as big and has highly motivated armed forces," a Foreign Office diplomat said yesterday.

Not if they're all glowing in the dark...(another anonymous foreign office diplomat speaks out!)

42 posted on 01/15/2006 7:44:06 AM PST by TADSLOS (Right Wing Infidel since 1954)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indcons
Essentially, this article says that we can do nothing, so we must accept a Nuclear Iran. Somehow this is supposed to resolve itself into some sort of mini-cold war balance or equilibrium. But, that only works with sane leaders. All bets are off regarding this bunch. We will find out the hard way, that acquiescence to the Iranian hardline is not the avoidance of a nuclear crisis, it is the guarantee of it.
43 posted on 01/15/2006 10:31:01 AM PST by Richard Axtell (We are approaching the Abyss, let's not let them steer us over the edge...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TADSLOS

"Apparantly, Israel doesn't rate."

nothing i have read indicated that the portion of the IAF that can reach Iran is adequate to hit all or most of the various 'identified' targets.


44 posted on 01/15/2006 12:43:53 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123
nothing i have read indicated that the portion of the IAF that can reach Iran is adequate to hit all or most of the various 'identified' targets.

Depends on what you read....and who you want to believe.

45 posted on 01/15/2006 12:47:53 PM PST by TADSLOS (Right Wing Infidel since 1954)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: indcons
I believe the author, Ian, has been corressponding with Andrea Greenspan... and possibly, Chris Matthews. Both these buffoons essentially alluded to the same thing Friday night.

Pure, 5th column disinformation... spewed to keep the sheeple fat & stupid... so that they panic when the balloon goes up.

46 posted on 01/15/2006 12:55:52 PM PST by johnny7 (“Iuventus stultorum magister”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson