It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Iranian nuclear program is a complex threat to international peace and stability. In this ambitious paper, former national security advisor Stephen J. Hadley says that stopping it requires an equally complex and sophisticated strategy.
Why conduct a review of Iran options now?
Partly because of the American experience in Iraq. The U.S. military action there was not, as many suggest, either a war of choice or a war of preemption. It was, rather, a war of last resort. After 12 years of diplomacy, 17 U.N. Security Council resolutions, increasingly targeted economic sanctions, multiple international inspection efforts, no-fly zones over both northern and southern Iraq, the selective use of U.S. military force in 1998, and Saddam Hussein's rejection of a final opportunity to leave Iraq and avoid war, the United States and the international community were out of options. The choice was either to capitulate to Saddam Hussein's defiance of the demands of the international community or to make good on the "serious consequences" promised by the United Nations for such defiance. The United States and its international partners on Iraq chose the latter course.
Option 1: Seek an interim 'stop the clock' agreement.
Option 2: Seek an interim "medium for medium" or "more for more" agreement.
Option 3: Seek a final agreement that resolves the nuclear issue.
Option 4: Embrace the de facto status quo.
Option 5: Long-Term Isolation and Pressure.
Option 6: Launch a limited, and preferably clandestine military strike.
Option 7: Launch a major, overt military strike.
Option 8: Acquiesce in a Nuclear-Armed Iran./quote]
LINK
The Iranian nuclear program is a complex threat to international peace and stability.
Option 8: Acquiesce in a Nuclear-Armed Iran.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by buster2010
Actually that was posted as option 8
Option 8: Acquiesce in a Nuclear-Armed Iran.
But do nothing UNTIL they attack America? ---> That would be called a False Flag for sure by some if they did.
Originally posted by buster2010
True some would call it a false flag but yes we shouldn't do anything until attacked. Preemptive strikes even when crying we are defending ourselves are just aggressive acts of war.
(Reuters) - Iran could launch a pre-emptive strike on Israel if it was sure the Jewish state was preparing to attack it, a senior commander of its elite Revolutionary Guards was quoted as saying on Sunday.
Amir Ali Hajizadeh, a brigadier general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, made the comments to Iran's state-run Arabic language Al-Alam television.
Why can't Iran have Nuclear energy weapons? Their enemies have it, having one would make others think twice about offense.
Originally posted by HIWATT
I'm with Buster.
Iran doesn't "need to be dealt with"
Sorry OP I didn't read your post. I stopped at:
The Iranian nuclear program is a complex threat to international peace and stability.
Says who?
The real truth here is in the answer
1) They signed the non proliferation act. They basically SAID, we won't build nuclear weapons....then went about doing it.
2) They are essentially a state sponsored supporter of international terrorism. Doesn't really matter what their beef is, or if it is legit. They have/are supporting a proxy war against Israel by supporting Hezbollah and Hamas in the areas north of Israel. They export terror. Do you want them exporting nuclear tech to terrorists?
3) While I know there is debate over the true translations, they have basicly threatened Israel with genocide. They have stated the world will soon be free of both the US and Israel. While attempting (allegedly) to build a nuclear weapon. Threatening Talk......Threatening Actions.
IMHO......The IDF WILL launch a limited strike, probably before the end of the year. Iran will retalliate, by attempting to seize the Strait of Hormuz AND by attacking US assets in the region (whether the US assists Israel or not) and possibly terror strikes within the US and Europe. The resulting chaos will cause a crash of the US and EU economy and potential civil unrest in both places. It could, (but in my thoughts won't) start a third World War,and at least a very large regional one. Could also possibly set up or begin the sequence of events that are the Judeao-Christian eschatological events..........but that's a whole other thread.
You guys are extremely naive then and dont understand how the world works or have no insight.
Its isn't just the Americans that are involved. ME and UN is also involved along with EU and Asia (Russia & China). Lets be realistic.
Originally posted by buster2010
I say we follow the option that isn't mentioned. Leave them alone. Until Iran actually attacks the America we have no right to do anything to them. They threaten Israel so what Israel has been threatening them also. Let Israel deal with their own problems.