A Question on Iran

[Subdivisions]

CBS News and the Associated Press is reporting that:

Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/20/world/main1913998.shtml

<snip>

"We won't suspend (uranium enrichment). Everything has to come out of negotiations. Suspension is not on our agenda," Asefi told a press conference Sunday.

<snip>

Iran has repeatedly stated it would ignore it, but the heightening of regional tensions after weeks of war in Lebanon seemed to have led the Islamic Republic to harden its position.

Iranians appeared to consider that the U.S. and Israel — the leading proponents of a tough stance against Tehran's nuclear program — have lost ground in the Middle East after the Lebanese Hezbollah guerrilla resisted Israeli air and ground assaults during the 34-day war that ended last Monday.

"Hezbollah is the front line for any attack against Iran," said Hamid Reza Shokouhi, the political editor at the conservative Rah-e-Mardom newspaper in Tehran.

"After Hezbollah's victory, Iran can stand up stronger in defending its nuclear rights," the journalist said, voicing a widespread opinion in the Iranian capital.

Iran helped create Hezbollah and is the Shiite Muslim group's main backer. It has nonetheless denied repeated Israeli claims that it armed the militia with sophisticated missiles and trained its fighters.

And, there of course in the big military war games exercised going on in Iran right now:

"We have to be prepared against any threat and we should be a role model for other countries," local newspapers quoted an Iranian Army spokesman, General Mohammad Reza Ashtiani, as saying last week.

My question is this:

Is Iran truly just practicing for the possibility it will be attacked or do you think they are conducting war games in anticipation that there WILL BE an attack?

Also, if Iran believes an attack is imminent, is it possible that they could prepare a pre-emptive strike "against any threat" they perceive? (On edit: It seems to be OK for the US to launch a pre-emptive strike on what it perceives to be its enemies, why not for Iran?)


And, let's not forget the Shiite factor in Iraq with regard to Iran's disposition in the overall picture.

Link: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/20/news/iran.php

[MissWaverly]

1. saw a rep from the American Enterprise Institute on Tv

They advise Bush on M.E. policy, basically they said that Bush will probably launch a nuclear
strike against Iran in 12-16 months; by that time there would be a solified enemy in the M.E.
to attack. (and don't forget that the run up to the 08 elections will be starting in 11/07). I
think that it's the Us vs the evil Them Strategy. I don't think Iran expects an attack now
but is posturing after the Hezbollah victory. To every point that was made the answer from
AEI was more bombs, troops, etc. I don't think that the American people want an all out war
with the Middle East.

[Subdivisions]

2. Of course the American people don't want

all out war, but that's not point.

You even said that the AEI says nuclear strikes and more weapons and more troops. If the AEI is basically "recommending" more violence, then why wouldn't Iran consider the imminent threat and launch their own pre-emptive strike, just as the US has done, rather than just having Ahmedinijhad waving his weeny at us?

[MissWaverly]

4. Because they are winning

They are using their money to help rebuild homes in Lebanon, their are already helping Turkey
in Kurdistan with tanks and troops. They don't need the all out strike we do, because they
have 141 million islamic peoples in the Middle East to back them up. Nukes are the best option
for someone w/o the boots on the ground to accomplish their aims. And who are they going to nuke, they don't have the firepower now to reach further than Israel and that would only increase US support of an Israeli offensive.

[FlavaKreemSnak]

3. Even if people don't want it, they have to act like they do

If you act like you don't want it, that is like saying you are against the war on terror which would mean you are a terror sympathizer. And nobody wants people saying that about them, they could lose their jobs, they could get kicked out of school, nobody would want to have anything to do with you, and you might even get detained, depending on what people say. I mean probably not but not many people will want to take the chance.

[MissWaverly]

6. We cannot fight terrorism with Neocon strategies

Iraq has nothing to do with the War on Terror, there are now terrorists
in 40-60 countries across the world, what do we do, pull a John Wayne on those countries too?
Bush started the war in Iraq, it is a fiasco and that is not the fault of some peace loving
hippie, him and Mr. 5 deferments are responsible and Rumsfailed.

[Jim__]

5. Who would Iran launch a preemptive strike against?

The US or Israel? I don't think so; either one could overpower Iran; and by striking first, Iran provides cover for the "retaliatory" attack. Even though both the Us and Israel can overpower Iran, I don't think either can easily knock out their nuclear facilities, and by trying, they give Iran the moral highground and the support of the world. If Israel or the US attacks Iran, I think Iran wins - not the war, but the political game and that will probably count for more than any attack will cost.

I also think the Iranian admin uses the threats from Israel and the US to domestic political advantage, and so, wants the US and Israel to keep the pressure up. The war games may be more for domestic political consumption.

[Phredicles]

7. Iraq

Big Shiite population, unrest ripe to be exploited, etc.

[Jim__]

8. Why would they do that?

Iraq is already moving the way they want it to. And once again, if they strike Iraq, they legitimize the retaliatory strike that would then definitely come against them. Besides, our 130,000 soldiers sitting in Iraq is Iran's ace in the hole. If we strike Iran, Iran strikes our military in Iraq.

If we began to fortify the Green Zone with anti-missile defenses, and fortify the Iraq/Iran border, then Iran would probably threaten a preemptive strike. But right now, Iran striking in Iraq doesn't make much sense.