So how long before those mad men force the US to attack Iran?

[Heraclitus]

I'm talking of course about the despicable NeoCons and Hawkish Democrats. By us I do mean mostly America and a few European countries, I just realize that sooner or later the occupation army (if they don't just settle for bombing them) will have a greater Euro presence.

I've been seeing a stronger and stronger Anti-Iran rhetoric over the past year. Is anyone here seriously convinced that Iran really represents a threat to the West in any meaningful way? I dispute that, any attack, even if they where really on the edge of gaining nuclear weapons, or even had them would be a giant waste of lives and money.

Actually I say, let Iran have nukes. They aren't ruled by nutters, at least no nuttier than all the other countries that have had or still have nuclear weapons and so far their stabilizing effect is clear.

Sure perhaps they represent a challenger to Israel for regional supremacy, and even the Saudis seem nervous at the sight of greater Iranian power... but so what?

[DaShi]

What? Really? Are you that desperate?

[VetLegion]

I don't follow those news closely, but from what I understood the Iranians are
quite open about using nukes to destroy Israel. As I said, I'm not sure, but I
believe that their president is always on about that.

In my opinion that gives Israel the right to attack preemptively and destroy Iran's
nuclear ability.

You can't say "but he doesn't really mean it". If he keeps saying it, it's a threat.
If they don't intend to attack Israel, Iranians should stop their top politician(s?)
from talking about it. You don't joke about nuking a country.

[VetLegion]

It's quite another thing whether the US should get involved, of course.
If I was the US president, I'd not. With the exception of invading North Korea,
I'd lead an isolationist foreign policy. Playing world policeman sucks. Let
the Chinese do it if they wish.

[Heraclitus]

To be perfectly fair he does attack the US rhetorically almost as much as Israel.

Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism? You should know that this slogan, this goal, can certainly be achieved.

But on the other hand, a certain leader of a nuclear armed superpower said this:

We will bury you!

[OzzyKP]

Ozzy's Estimates of what'll happen with Iran & the bomb:

35% - Israel bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
25% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, but doesn't use it (unless attacked).
15% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes Israel.
14% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) but Iran doesn't get (or want) nukes, just power plants.
5% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes someone else (Saudi Arabia, United States, etc)
5% - The US bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
1% - The US bombs, invades & occupies Iran.

[Solomwi]

Ozzy's Estimates of what'll happen with Iran & the bomb:

35% - Israel bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
25% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, but doesn't use it (unless attacked).
15% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes Israel.
14% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) but Iran doesn't get (or want) nukes, just power plants.
5% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes someone else (Saudi Arabia, United States, etc)
5% - The US bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
1% - The US bombs, invades & occupies Iran.

I think #2 is by far the most likely outcome, with #1 a distant second.

[OzzyKP]

I think if they got the bomb that is far and away the most likely option (though I listed a 20% chance of them getting and using the bomb, so I suppose I didn't put in enough thought to my list), but the question is would Israel sit on their hands long enough to allow them to get one? They don't really give a damn about what the world thinks of them, I doubt they'd be willing to take that chance.

[OzzyKP]

Revision:

42% - Israel bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
34% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, but doesn't use it (unless attacked).
10% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) but Iran doesn't get (or want) nukes, just power plants.
8% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes Israel.
3% - The US bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
2% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes someone else (Saudi Arabia, United States, etc)
1% - The US bombs, invades & occupies Iran.

[OzzyKP]

This is a fun (but hard) game. I wonder what other people would put the percentage chances at for the above scenarios (or others).

[Solomwi]

I don't think Israel just sits by of its own volition. I'm just skeptical of their ability to actually impede Iran's progress, particularly at this stage. Iran seems to have met too many milestones, and taken too many precautions, for an Israeli attack to be more than a speed bump. Throw in the possible diplomatic scenarios that could keep Israel from acting in time (assuming that time hasn't passed), and there's a lot that could go wrong on the way to an "Israel saves the day" outcome.

[Flubber]

Revision:

42% - Israel bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
34% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, but doesn't use it (unless attacked).
10% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) but Iran doesn't get (or want) nukes, just power plants.
8% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes Israel.
3% - The US bombs Iran pre-emptively to slow/stop their nuclear program.
2% - We do nothing (but ineffective sanctions) and Iran gets a nuke, and nukes someone else (Saudi Arabia, United States, etc)
1% - The US bombs, invades & occupies Iran.

My only quick comment is that some of these options are not mutually exclusive-- There could be bombing and Iran still gets a nuke and then does or does not use it . You treat bombing as a endpoint in and of itself. Do you assume that bombing will certainly prevent nuke acquisition?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

interesting one...

Iran getting the nuke 50:50
if Iran gets the nuke:
Iran using the nuke other in defense 1:99
Iran using the nuke if attacked conventionally 2:98 (ie - no chance, unless attacked by superior force which could effectively threaten them, I doubt they would use it even for some regular Army/Air skirmish with Israel... they bomb them conventionally instead)
Iran using the nuke if attacked nuclearly 80:20 (20% is that the first attack will be so successfull to take all their capability out first)

The more important question is - who has the interest or money in the west to go to another war/bombing campaign?

The war machine is bleeding the taxpayers dry in the US (which was the original idea anyhow... so they do not need another war to do the same), and using more than their fair share of budgets for the rest of the western world for virtually nothing, both in Iraq and Afghanistan... in whose interest would be to repeat this with even worse consequences with a more capable/numerous enemy such as Iran?

Because there are none, and even powerful hawks in the west are not totally insane ala Hitler, the invasion will not be happening.

North Korea is far more unstable country in "perpetual" war with a close target, where they can deliver their nukes any day of the week, and do they use it? No... they also know that the day they used it, it would be the day the northern part of the peninsula would become one huge ocean filled crater... and even insane dictatorships want to continue to exist.

[VetLegion]

But on the other hand, a certain leader of a nuclear armed superpower said this:

If you mean Nikita Hruscev I do believe that a preemptive strike by the US
on the Soviet Union would have been justified. Vice versa as well.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

even Pakistan is more unstable than Iran... well they are "allies"... at the moment...