Originally Posted by RayManKiller3
Don't forget Russia and U.S did this as well.
But not with terrorist activity. I think you point to the Cuba crisis. Both Russia and the US didn't want to use nukes, the problem was how to avoid it without either losing face. A US reporter and a Russian spy were paramount in solving this.
Originally Posted by MontyB
The problem with this is that it is still only an assumption that they want to build a bomb, now personally I don't really care whether they do or the don't want one if we are not going to bother about India, Pakistan, North Korea or Israel joining the nuclear club then we should not worry about Iran and I agree it would quieten US and Israeli aspirations in the region down a bit which wouldn't be a bad thing.
The first thing we must do is to prevent new members
to the club and then we can (try) to tackle the others. How in the world are you going to decrease nukes when you allow new members in?
Originally Posted by 42RM
The United States will not attack Iran to prevent her from acquiring nuclear weapons. Geo-political realities discourage American military action. A bombing raid would have to be intensive and prolonged, lasting 2 to 3 weeks, and even then, may not work. The lesson of Iraq, the last preventive war launched by the United States, is that Washington should not choose war when there are still other options, and it should not base its decision to attack on best-case analyses of how it hopes the conflict will turn out. Iran is no Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan or Iraq. In all of these examples, the U.S. military defeated an adversary incapable of competing with superior American land, naval, and air forces. The Iranian military is far more competent and capable, and after watching the war in Iraq for a decade has a good understanding of U.S. tactics and strategy.
Add to all of this Americaís economic difficulties and the war-weariness of the American people, and any American government will prefer economic sanctions against Iran to the uncertainties of a military strike. And what is true for the Obama administration will be true for a Republican administration. For the United States, determining what a nuclear weapons-free Iran is worth is critical. Had the American people understood the costs of Iraq before the war began, itís unlikely they would have given their consent. Given the current economic woes of the country, that cannot happen again.
In the unlikely event that we attack, I would probably be among the first to go - would you?
No one is going to attack Iran unless they are 110% sure they are building the bomb. It's all in the hands of the Iranians and the intelligence agencies (who can make mistakes as in Iraq). When Iran is building the bomb Israel will surely attack, alone if necessary. A western attack on Iran's nuclear capabilities will involve few boots on the ground. They will destrpoy their navy, air defenses and nuclear sites. No need to take on the Iranian army.
BTW, the Iraqi forced also looked strong on paper.