RichC wrote:Stating they want Israel "wiped off the map" is kind of really being on the case of aggression rather than defensive.
As I understand it there is a very real possibility Ahmadinejad was saying that the goverment of Israel should be replaced, not what is normally batted around on here as above. See link;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ah ... and_Israel
My last paragraph may not have been worded that well Rich. I was saying that if purely for sanctions imposed upon them the Iranians close the strait then I would expect us to re open it. Purely from a commercial point of view, Iran as the seller and the West as a buyer a simplified way of looking at the sanctions is to say we don't like the sellers attitude so we are not going to buy from him. He then has a choice, change his attitude to please his customer or lose the sale/find alternative customers. Iran does not have an automatic right to sell oil IMO so to stop other countries from selling it by mining the strait would be wrong.
However, looking at this sensibly, the more we put Iran into a corner and the less oil they are selling the less they will have to lose and the more likely they are to close the strait. Seems like a lot of hot air though as that would have only one outcome for them. I don't think they would do it and invite attack, just like I don't think they would nuke Israel and invite destruction if they did have the bomb. There is an argument that suggests that an important part in helping the worlds' economies to recover would be to actually lift sanctions on Iranian oil, allowing them to increase the flow onto the market by about 3% and watch the price drop significantly. War in the Middle East and a stifled flow of oil will have the opposite effect to the global recovery if it is prolonged. Hence my previous comment about our reliance on such countries for our energy. Wouldn't the world just be a better place if we were sitting on the oil reserves and not the Iranians...? Does that make it right for us to control such countries though? Sometimes I feel that the strong should control the weak and if we want something we can take it. Other times I think we are a waning power and we should leave the head table at the world with our heads held high and acting morally, whilst finding other ways domestically to survive. Be careful who you kick on the way up the ladder, you may well meet them on the fall back down...
hertsman, as always manages to strike a balanced viewpoint, with clear understandings of both sides of a given argument. Non proliferation is an interesting one for me. Despite my ramblings on here and trying to question common held views, my own included I actually know that all morals are selfish, mine especially. It is easy for me to type on a computer that countries should all be equal but deep down I don't believe that. If that means them getting nuclear weapons and they would use them at all and it brought harm to someone I loved then I would categorically say no they can't have them. There is not for me a logical argument that the Iranians can't have nuclear power, you could even suggest that just like you couldn't have an India with it and Pakistan without or vice versa, that Iran/Israel are the same. They might even get along better! But my survival instinct is stronger than any up in the air morals about fairness, so I think the least countries with nukes the better.
Incidentally, I think the drastic reduction of the human population that has to occur within the next century unless we make massive leaps forward will either be from a huge nuclear war, or more likely a laboratory created/mutated super virus. It has always been war or plagues that have kept the human population down, or lack of food presumably, so if we can manage not to kill ourselves, deliberately through war or accidentally though meddling with viruses then we may run out of food/resources (same thing effectively) and the quantity of human life will be unsustainable. I diverse, what I am getting at is that for me a biological warfare attack is just as scary as a nuclear one. On the news the other day a couple of labs had easily mutuated bird flu so that it would pass from human to human, imagine if a country had done this, created a antidote for themselves then used agents to spray it into the aircon systems of population centres of enemy countries worldwide. The death toll could be unthinkable. How do you police that? Iran may already have it I beileve the Soviet Union used to work on such things and there is a link there...
It just seems to me that America is spoiling for this war and Iran are like a cornered rat. Not a nice country for sure, but understandably they feel like there back is up against the wall. If this does not blow over directly then I am sure the back door of Syria will allow it to happen...
Would appreciate the Coords if you can get it.
