Iran

[monk222]

In the 1970s, disgruntled young Iranians rebelled against a corrupt secular regime by embracing an ascetic form of Islam. Now they’re rebelling against a corrupt religious regime by embracing personal freedom — in some cases, even sex, drugs and rock ’n’ roll.

-- Nicholas D. Kristof at The New York Times

Kristof writes about how the Iranian youth are becoming increasingly freer despite their repressive government. His argument is that if we can refrain from invading Iran, we will surely see the tide turn as the more liberal young rise to prominence. Conversely, if we invade Iran, we will likely only strengthen the regime as well as set back liberalization in that country.

On the other hand, we have a fanatic regime that will soon have nuclear bombs. It is a tough position.

Comments

[foolsguinea.livejournal.com]

A) Lots of countries have had nukes for years, including France (imperialists), Pakistan (unstable), The former Soviet Union (actually collapsed), the USA (thinks it runs the globe, engages in international terrorism), and Great Britain (generally regarded as archenemy by the Iranian regime). So them having nukes is not automatic immediate disaster, and if they use them, there are those who would retaliate.

B) Iran insists they want a self-sustaining nuclear power system more than nuclear weapons. Some of the stuff they are doing that causes concern in Washington and Jerusalem is explainable on these lines. If they can engineer and manufacture their own parts, and mine and refine their own uranium, without importing material from, say, Canada (a satellite of the hated English), they will feel more energy independent.

I'm not an expert Iran-watcher, but when they say they're not building nuclear weapons, they are from what I can tell reasonably credible.

So, yeah, I think the paranoia in the US Congress and the Knesset is overblown.

[hardblue.livejournal.com]

There may be a little paranoia in it, but we can also afford to be cooler about the possibilities. I have to think that the Israelis have good reason to feel uneasy. Iran already supports terrorists groups seeking to undermine Israel, and it is not a gross exaggeration to say that the Iranian government, along with Islamists in general, would love to see Israel annhilated. From there, it might be hoped that Mutually Assured Destruction would keep those nuclear weapons holstered, but I think there is reason to worry that the Iranian government wouldn't mind going out in a blaze of glory (understanding that the leaders will probably be 'vacationing' elsewhere during an attack). In any case, I suppose we will find out, because I do not think we have ever succeeded in keeping a country from getting nuclear weapons.