Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FORUM:Defiant Iran Are the mullahs overplaying their hand?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
seemslikeadream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-08-08 07:34 PM
Original message
FORUM:Defiant Iran Are the mullahs overplaying their hand?
Edited on Fri Aug-08-08 07:36 PM by seemslikeadream
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/09/forumdefiant-iran/

FORUM: Defiant Iran
Are the mullahs overplaying their hand?
Frank Richter
Saturday, August 9, 2008

Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon that could threaten Israel. That´s the conventional wisdom. But what if Iran´s belligerent behavior is just a big bluff designed to push petroleum prices higher?

Nuclear weapons would undermine, not enhance, Iran´s national security. The mere perception that a country is trying to acquire nuclear weapons makes it a target. Saddam Hussein found that out the hard way.

If Iran had a nuclear arsenal, Israel, the United States and France would immediately target Tehran with nuclear missiles. In 2006, then-President Jacques Chirac of France warned that any large-scale, state-sponsored terrorist attack on France would invite a closely targeted nuclear response.

Trace elements of highly enriched uranium (HEU) in the fallout of a terrorist nuclear bomb could potentially identify its source. In 2003, the Iranians admitted using centrifuges containing traces of HEU. Iran claimed the HEU residue was from equipment obtained from Pakistan. Any nuclear device used by terrorists might be traced back to countries in the A.Q. Khan nuclear network, specifically Pakistan, Libya, North Korea and Iran.

But Pakistan is an ally, Libya has forsaken nukes, and North Korea, with thousands of artillery pieces just 35 miles from Seoul, is too dangerous to attack. Downtown Tehran would be the most politically palatable return address for any nuclear retaliation and the Iranians know it.

Iran has no need for a nuclear deterrent. The U.S.-led attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan eliminated Iran´s two hostile neighbors — Saddam and the Taliban. A nuclear Iran would alarm Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. They could join a formal U.S. alliance seeking an American nuclear umbrella. Iran would be surrounded by permanent U.S. bases and American-trained Arab armies.

Saudi Arabia or Egypt might go nuclear, if they believed Iran had nuclear weapons. Washington recently signed a memorandum with Riyadh to help the Saudis with civilian nuclear energy as we did the shah of Iran in the 1950s.

If Israel were attacked by Iranian nuclear weapons, Iran would be annihilated by Israel´s 75 to 200 nuclear warheads. An Iranian nuclear strike on Israel would spew massive radioa ctive fallout on millions of Muslims in the region. First-generation nuclear bombs typically have much more radioactive fallout than advanced warhead designs. Arab citizens of Israel and Palestinians are poverty-prone and far less likely to have access to bomb shelters than Jewish Israelis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC