Fleeting Safety

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579294,00.html?test=latestnews

Over the last few weeks, I have read several articles on Iran's intentions regarding its nuclear program. Iran has no intentions of accepting a deal that would allow other countries to enrich Iran's uranium into fuel rods for energy production, as I predicted back when the deal was announced. In fact, the country claims it will work ever harder toward acquiring nuclear capabilities: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578712,00.html

Why would Iran give up the ability to make its own nuclear energy? Doing so would force the country to be dependent on others while infringing on its own sovereignty. Considering the United States is both able to make its own nuclear energy and trying to become energy dependent, agreeing to the deal would communicate that Iran is admitting it does not and should not have the same rights as other countries.

Obviously it would be great for the rest of the world if Iran had accepted this deal, but what was the point in proposing it (or wasting the time negotiating it)? How could anyone actually think Iran would accept? I am sure Iran's nuclear energy negotiators made it sound like the deal would be accepted back home; their mission is surely to buy as much time for Iran to develop nuclear capabilities as possible.

This proposal was successful in only one way; it gave Iran more time. I appreciate Obama's preference for diplomatic action. But the facts are simple; in the past year, Iran has gotten closer to acquiring a nuclear weapon. The country has done little to suggest it would like to peacefully co-exist with Israel or the United States. Obama's foreign policy has produced no results with Iran. With every passing day, it appears like a strategic attack on Iran's nuclear facilities is our best option. Sanctions will not work because major economic partners of Iran will not go along willingly, plain and simple.

Before we attack Iran, we need to lay out our intelligence against the country. We need other countries to support the same intelligence. We need to tell Iran we plan on attacking their nuclear weapon production capabilities, and most importantly, why (because of their repeated threats to Israel and the western world). And, we need to give Iran enough time to reverse their behavior. We should not be spending our time negotiating economic sanctions or trying to find a way to produce Iran's energy for them. We need to put up or shut up.

I am not arguing for an occupation of the country or a regime change. I simply think we should warn Iran of our intentions, explain our reasoning, allow them to act like they can peacefully exist with all countries, and then send a few bunker buster bombs to level Iran's underground facilities if they do not comply. World reaction might be similiar to the reaction that came after we attacked Iraq. But I would rather have the world hate us then stand by and wait for Iran to acquire the bomb before doing something about it.

Here is a link to the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran: http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/20071203_release.pdf. It goes way back to 2007, and does not confirm in any way that Iran is currently working to develop nuclear weapons. However, pressure is growing to revise this report as a result of new intelligence: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1121596.html.

Just my thoughts...I welcome all debate!

Until we meet again, goodbye!