News Is Iran Next on Bush's Military Agenda?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Art
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
President Bush warned Iran that "all options are on the table" if it does not cease its nuclear program, following Iran's announcement to resume uranium enrichment. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is expected to refer Iran to the UN Security Council, but potential vetoes from China and Russia may hinder any severe actions. The discussion suggests that a military strike against Iran could lead to significant regional instability, including threats to the Strait of Hormuz and potential retaliation from Iran. Concerns are raised about the implications of U.S. military action, including alienation of Middle Eastern allies and the challenges of sustaining operations in Iraq. The situation reflects broader issues of U.S. foreign policy and the complexities of international relations in the region.
  • #61
Skyhunter said:
More people believe we share a common ancestor than believe in evolution :confused: :confused:

Maybe they believe that apes evolved from humans and not the other way around. (I'm joking, of course, but the poll would make sense if this were the case.)

Now what was that about fundamentalism in the US?

It's unchanged since 1982?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
El Hombre Invisible said:
What comes next? Invading a country on the grounds it WOULD comprimise American national security if it ever considered acquiring the means?

Several steps are ahead:

1) invading neutral countries that might, one day, decide not to consider not to acquire the means.

2) invading allies that might one day distanciate themselves, placing them in situation 1).

3) invading the US itself, on the grounds that one day, it might consider NOT to invade countries satisfying 2), and hence put itself at danger.

4) destroy themselves right now, because they might one day decide upon 3) and hence pose a big threat to the US, which has to be eliminated pre-emptively.

:smile:
 
  • #63
Skyhunter said:
Now what was that about fundamentalism in the US?

Guh, a bunch of theocrats with nukes, scary !
 
  • #64
In spite of Iran's nuclear program taking the headlines, I think possible conventional weapons coming into Iraq from Iran are a little troubling.

An Iraq based on Shiite law would make a better neighbor for Iran than a pro-US neighbor would, so there's at least some credibility in the idea that Iran would like to see enough chaos in Iraq that the US won't be very picky about how we get out. Assuming, of course, Iran thinks it could help the Iraqi Shiites prevent an all out civil war from breaking out - we're having a hard time doing that, ourselves.

I don't think the US would bomb Iran based on the nuclear weapons program alone. But, there's always been a big risk of the Iraq invasion spilling over the border into Syria or Iran. I wouldn't be at all shocked to see the war spread over the border and into Iran.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 132 ·
5
Replies
132
Views
14K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
8K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
9K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
8K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 490 ·
17
Replies
490
Views
40K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 193 ·
7
Replies
193
Views
23K