Should U.S. attack Iran's nuclear program?

[galtgulch]

If the U.S. were to attack Iran's nuclear facilities successfully would that render Iran impotent

to retaliate against us?

How likely is Iran to use its nuclear capability to stage an attack on the U.S.?

Is there an alternative under the present circumstances? Is it immoral to refrain from attacking Iran

as suggested in an letter which appeared in a Rhode Island newspaper on July 19, 2007?

Here is the link to that letter:

http://www.projo.com/opinion/letters/conte...D1.16fdac2.html

If we do attack them it would only be a matter of time before they find some way to "retaliate." If we do not

attack it will still be only a matter of time before they attack the West presumably. I do wish we had the time

to wait until their population, a huge percentage of which is under twenty five years of age, comes to its senses and gives up their mistaken interpretation of their religion and adopts peaceful ways.

I think an attack now would alienate their populace as well as diminish the nuclear threat for some time to come. Question whether Bush will order such an attack or will we have to wait for the next administration?

We are not talking about an Iraq style invasion or a nuclear attack just conventional weapons. I believe we

know where their facilities are located.

I worry about suitcase bombs carried into major cities here and in Europe. I imagine that if we take out their nuclear capability they could still access materials for what I fear from North Korea or elsewhere anyway.

There is some hope that a fundamentailist Islamic scholar is interpreting the Koran to forbid the kind of jihad being waged. He has a great deal of convincing to do.

galt

[Dodger]

There is a huge difference between a potential threat and an imminent threat.

Everything poses as a potential threat, but only occasionally do we have to deal with an imminent one.

Iran is a potential threat.

Nothing more.

Edited July 23, 2007 by Mitchell Hill

[Chris Grieb]

Iran's nuclear program is more of threat to Israel. They should take care of it.

[Wolf DeVoon]

Is it immoral to refrain from attacking Iran?

That depends how you feel about elephants.

The oil business is divided into three equal sectors. National oil companies (Kuwait, Pemex, Gazprom) seize assets and create jobs for family members. Independents (Marathon, Oxy, Woodside) discover and produce new hydrocarbon assets. The majors (Shell, BP, Exxon) need elephants -- huge oil fields to fill supertankers. Natural gas is nice, but you can't fuel aircraft or heavy vehicles with propane. The Pentagon needs oil.

Iran has some gas. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the Emirates have declining fields, enough to keep the ruling families comfortable but not much potential beyond that. There is only one elephant left: Iraq. That's why we decapitated its government and have no intention of ever leaving.

Our purpose in attacking Iran is to provoke and then destroy Iran's million-man army and prevent them from threatening our possession of the elephant. I don't see any morality in it at all.

W.