And Bush tells people he believes some omnipotent superhero, born out of a virgin impregnated by a ghost, will usher the saved into heaven as seven trumpet blasts signal the Apocalypse. Your point here being what exactly?</blockquote

Ok Bush is a christian and so has been every psst prez. What’s your point? You’re offering moral equivalence with Iran’s thugs?

Yea, Pakistan is bad enough. You wanna keep adding to that problem? A problerm that could force other middle eastern states to try and go nuke?

And Bush tells people he believes some omnipotent superhero, born out of a virgin impregnated by a ghost, will usher the saved into heaven as seven trumpet blasts signal the Apocalypse. Your point here being what exactly?

“How about proliferating dirty bombs to terror groups?”

Ask the US’s main ally in Central Asia, Pakistan. They’re the ones with the biggest track record of corrupt officials and scientists flogging off nuke tech and weapons systems to unsavoury folks ranging from North Korea to the Taliban.

I’m not advocating an attack on Iran. Just looking at the options.

Well weve managed to live with a nuked North Korea, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Israel, China and Russia, all of whom at one time or another have behaved in equally bellicose and unstable fashion.

Yea, but I’m sure that you could play poker with these guys and would they probably stick to the rules. Uncle A and the Mullahs are just as likely as to argue they’ve won with a pair of two’s to your full house aces high. Some of these guys think there’s a young dude living at the bottom of a well, so you may not be playing with a full deck.

How about proliferating dirty bombs to terror groups? How the hell do you trace that stuff? That would be US’s obvious concerns. And why shouldn’t Israel take Uncle A at his word? Jews may realize it’s a good strategy to do so take if they say they want to obliterate you.

Besides, do you really think the two main purchasers (China and India) of Irans only significant export (hydrocarbons) are gonna let it run amuck or be seriously amucked around with by the Yanks.

Dunno, but it would be riveting viewing on CNN and financial stocks would hate it.

I think the real issue here is how threatened the US or Israel feels to pull the pin.

Well we’ve managed to live with a nuked North Korea, Pakistan, India, South Africa, Israel, China and Russia, all of whom at one time or another have behaved in equally bellicose and unstable fashion. Often to eachother.

“seeing Iranian missiles could reach the centre of Europe”

Why? Where else are Iranian energy revenues gonna be put to work? The US? The EU is one big money laundry, show town, shopping arcade, brothel, boardwalk and holiday home. Who’d want to nuke the place where your kids go to school, your wife goes shopping and where you get laid on business trips.

Besides, what’s left of the RN Trident sub fleet and the Force de Frappe is still perfectly capable of wiping out all of Ira’s major population centres in response. This is not exactly a ultra for your eyes only secret y’know.

Besides, do you really think the two main purchasers (China and India) of Iran’s only significant export (hydrocarbons) are gonna let it run amuck or be seriously amucked around with by the Yanks.

To paraphrase Dustin Hoffman in ‘Wag The Dog”, this is nothing. Try 30,000 nuclear warheads designed to wipe out whole continents, with the go codes controlled by paranoid and senile old men with a fifties mindset.

Do a deal as you suggest in which case the region will take it as invitation to develop their own nukes. I couldn’t imagine the Gulf States or Egypt acquiescing to a nuked up Iran. The Gulf could be offered the US nuke umbrella but who would find that credible as the US would be seen to have cut and run from Iraq.

or

The US does attack Iran’s nuke installations.

There is a third but unlikely choice which is that the world lives with a nuked Iran but even the Europeans aren’t showing much appetite for that strategy these days seeing Iranian missiles could reach the centre of Europe.

Yes I agree. But in part that’s my point. You can’t just say you’re going to pull out and let the chips (human lives) fall where they may. Some sort of deal with Iran is probably one of the few options the US has that isn’t necessarily a complete disaster (although it will go over with the Saudis like a pork chop in a synagogue/mosque).

Umm, why? The Iraq war is rightly very unpopular, so any wriggling won’t be for political reasons. If anything we can expect the political pressure to be for even faster withdrawal – hedging on this has certainly not helped Hillary.

Strategically it’s really hard to see what the GIs are achieving there other than souring relations with allies and with Iraq’s neighbours, and pushing the Iraqi body count higher. Given the terrible budgetary problem he’s inherited and the prospect of defeat in Afghanistan he’ll surely have much better uses for the blood and treasure. The key is to cut a deal with the Iranians – something they have repeatedly offered.

.. and concludes unsurprisingly that the best thing to do is nothing much while hoping someone invents carbon-eating trees!

I’m fairly sure such things exist. We call them … er … ‘trees’.

BTW Does anyone know of any non-aligned US political bloggers who produce decent material that isnt blatantly partisan spin for their favoured candidate?

I hear Bigfoot is doing some good stuff.