News

I missed it?

I didn't even know about it ;)

I don't believe that Iran will ever use Nuclear weapon if they had it. Similar to Iraq war that even during the hardship, they never used chemical or biological weapons against Saddam Army.

But an Israeli attack, as Iranian government has clarified, means American attack, so the US Military in Iraq becomes a fair game. Also Iran is currently against the terrorists in Afghanistan but things could change.

Some pro-war people (mostly conservatives) believe that Iran is similar to Nazi Germany and if we took care of Hitler then the world would have not witness WWII.

Three points:

Hitler could have won if the US attacked first. Since the Nazi aggression would have been replaced with ideological war between races. You never know, it's hard to judge the outcome. Hitler perhaps would have just fought the country that attacked him and the he would have kicked their butt badly.

Iran is not Germany, ME is not Europe and the world is a different place. We must be very careful about the word "preemptive strike". If this concept becomes a normal foreign policy of every nation, then diplomacy will be replaced with wars and mis trust.

I used to be against the Nuclear weapons. I believe that if the world gets rid of all their N weapons, would be beneficial for all. But since that's not going to happen, I am turning towards the other option that if all countries had a nuclear capability, the chances of war becomes minimized. Stupid thinking? Perhaps, but there are some truth in that.

IRANdokht Aziz

You're absolutely right about the idiocy of using a term like "surgical strike".  I'm for dialogue.  There's never been any question of that and I think you know where I personally stand.  I don't disagree with ANYTHING you've said.  This isn't about what I would support but simply a rhetorical question about Israel.  I just wonder if there isn't a certain demonizing just because it might be Israel who does it... even when so many actually support such a strike!

I'm probably going to regret even asking such a question...LOL.

Surgical strikes

American lady jan

it blows my mind when people use the expression "surgical strike" as if there is some sort of precision associated with it! Besides the usual misfires and wrong calculations,  attacking the nuclear sites means a lot of casualties. The sights were built in heavily populated areas. The other danger of attacking the sights would be the obvious one involving the health hazards of nuclear facilities leaking, being damaged or blown up. 

Why would anyone care who destroys Iran?  I guess it won't matter who does it. If Israel does it and if there is any retaliation, then US will be involved and it will become a full-blown war. So it really won't matter who starts it, the results is destruction and death of innocent people.

now IRI is claiming that their nuclear programs are peaceful. Attacking them and destroying the buildings where the facilities are will not stop the actual nuclear program: they're just buildings!!! 

The brains behind these facilities can replace those in a short amoutn of time and you better believe that their mission will not be peaceful at all. Not only they will start every effort to make weapons, they will aim it at Israel the first chance they get.

So what's a better strategy? opening dialogues between the nations or attempting surgical attacks? I hope they get down from the devil's donkey soon (Ask your hubby to translate ;-) )

Abarmard jan you missed out dear! Sangria isn't sweet, it's actually "malass" and Desi sure knows how to make it.

Desi jan that estekan was refilled many many times  ;-)

IRANdokht

Biden

I think the whole Biden comment was over dramatized and taken out of context.  It's a certainty that either one of them would be dealing with a crisis next year... from the economy to the Israel/Iran situation.

But just to play devil's advocate here for a moment.  There is a certain percentage of people, on IC and in general, that do support a surgical strike on Iran.  If that's true, would their target be the mullahs specifically, or the nuclear sites.  If you agree that Iran shouldn't develope a nuclear weapon (emphasis on weapon), then it follows that a strike on the nuclear sites would be approved/tolerated/acceptable.  Now...the big question. 

Would it be any less acceptable if Israel were to initiate the strike... or the US?

I know where some of you stand... vehemently opposed to ANY outside interference.  But there are still many who would support minimal aggression if it were directed at the Regime itself.  So, again I wonder, why would it make a difference who did it? 

I absolutely want the receipe for that sangria.  It was one of the best I've ever had.  I'll trade you some sangria for some mast.  We had about 10 gallons of that as well....lol.

Never had Sangria

I have served it to customers back in the days, but never had it. Looks too sweet. Next time send invitation and we'll make sure nothing would be "wasted"!!

I wonder if this was the

I wonder if this was the test Biden was predicting for Obama.  An Israeli attack on Iran.  "As retarded as Bush may is..."   Unfortunately that was me writing sober.  I'm stuck with all this sangria because Irandokht e aziz was drinking it out of an estekane chai.  

Urgency to attack Ira....

Can we plz give part of TEXAS ranch to Israel and stop the war?

THX

Desi. Stop scaring us

What you said about those Gulf states is 300% true and then some. Kuwait owes the US a lot of sexual favors after we saved their asses back in '91. Now we got rid of the bastard next door, we got an airbase and stuff there, but they sill have to help us out. 

Israel is ruled by just the same kind of idiots as Iran is. They are no better or smarter. They make mistakes they hurt people and above all, they deny that they do wrong. What a wonderful world! 

wouldn't that be devastating!

If they start a war just before Obama takes office, he would have to fix that problem too!!  aren't there enough things GWB broke already?

Desi jan I should have had more of that yummy Sangria!  It sounds like you've been taking care of it though ;-)  (As retarded as Bush may is... ??)  I really should have helped out

:0)

IRANdokht

 AW, As retarded as Bush

 AW,

As retarded as Bush may is...he's not the one that would encourage it.  He knows that he destroyed his party and his 8 year legacy with 2 unpopular wars.  He also can't afford it.  However if Israel attacks Iran's nuclear sites and Iran retaliates, the US wouldn't have any choice but to defend its number one ally and go to war.  This is what Israel is banking on.  They're probably also hoping to get help from the gulf states who want to see Iran weakened.  Israel would need to do this before January.  

PS:  Somehow I ended up with 10 gallons of sangria back in my fridge.  How'd that happen?

Sometimes I just want to crawl under the covers and

hide from all the talk of war and attacks.  I can't... no, I WON'T believe Bush, et al, is stupid enough to encourage an attack on Iran, from Israel or anyone else. 

But... I've been wrong before.

Do you guys remember this

Do you guys remember this guy

//iranian.com/main/singlepage/2008/israel...

We dismissed him as an Art Bell listening nut job in the mountains of Arizona.  There may be some truth to it after all.  There's also the NPR interview done by Terry Gross.  She interviewed an ex CIA operative that said the same thing last month.    

Go ahead!

Go ahead attack and I would I would release my Hamas,Islamic Jihad,Hezbullah dogs on you.Woof Woof

They are innocent

To think they way they do. Take a look at our Israeli crowd in this site, they are all influenced by Fox news and fear mongers that they follow.

Israel, as we say in Shiraz is "vaa vey laa"