Iran Labelled as "Centre of Tyranny"

mr_angry

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4193909.stm

BBC_News wrote:

Iran tops the list of "potential trouble-spots" worldwide, according to US Vice-President Dick Cheney.

But Mr Cheney said diplomacy was the best way, for the time being, to ease the crisis over Iran's nuclear plans.

As George W Bush began a second term as president, Mr Cheney said the US did not want another war in the region.

Iranian leaders, who reject suspicions they are building nuclear weapons, have said US forces will not risk a "lunatic" attack on their country.

President Mohammad Khatami said Tehran was fully prepared to defend itself but it did not expect the US, already overstretched in Iraq, to mount an offensive.

Israel risk

Speaking just before his inauguration, Mr Cheney told MSNBC: "We don't want a war in the Middle East, if we can avoid it.

"And certainly in the case of the Iranian situation, I think everybody would be best suited by or best treated and dealt with if we could deal with it diplomatically," he said.

But if Iran continued to resist demands to rein in its nuclear programme - which Tehran insists is solely to produce electricity - the US would seek international sanctions against the country from the UN Security Council, the vice-president warned.

He also suggested that Israel might itself take action against Iran to safeguard its own future - indicating that this would be highly undesirable.

Iran was also cited as a centre of tyranny by the new US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, in her confirmation hearings this week.

An article by veteran investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, has claimed US special forces are already operating discreetly inside Iran to identify nuclear sites.

'Saddam to blame'

Mr Cheney also said he miscalculated how long it would take Iraq to recover from the impact of Saddam Hussein's rule.

He blamed the brutality of the regime for what he said was the slowness of Iraqis to "take control of their own affairs" following the US invasion.

"The brutality that he [Saddam Hussein] used in 1991 to put down the revolt at the time I think just had devastating consequences in terms of the ability of the Iraqi people to recover from his rule," he said.

The Bush administration has been repeatedly criticised by its opponents for not admitting mistakes were made in the handling of the occupation of Iraq.

It seems that a diplomatic effort is more likely in the case of Iran, unless the Israeli's decide to take matters into their own hands, but at least he had the decency to say that would be 'undesirable'.

However, it seems clear that the US still believes the Iranians are running a nuclear weapons programme, despite repeated denials and a recent deal with the EU. Would you rely on US intelligence again this time?

Hobbes

Why was it ok for Israel to run a nuclear weapons program and keep it hidden from the inspectors but it isn't for Iran even though they are being open about inspections?

Looking more and more US might hit Iran, although how I am not sure. The US population certainly wouldn't be up for it unless there was a very good reason.

BuffyBot

"Centre of Tyranny" is the new "Axis of Evil" I'm guessing

bonkey

BuffyBot wrote:

"Centre of Tyranny" is the new "Axis of Evil" I'm guessing

Afghanistan is gone.

Pakistan (on the original list, I seem to recall) was taken off the list once Musharraf started helping the US.

North Korea are finally coming back to the negotiating table, and were really unhappy about being on the Axis in the first place....and we know they've definitely got nukes.

Iran is the only nation left on the original axis where the US isn't directly shooting itself in the foot by being insultingly belligerant in its references to them.

So yeah...I'd go with your guess.

jc

simu

This seems to be the latest update of evily tyrannical outposted axes:

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=602570

Cuba, Zimbabwe, Burma and Belarus, as well as Iran and North Korea, the two surviving founder members of the original "axis of evil

DadaKopf

Cuba, Zimbabwe, Burma, Belarus - more soft targets. America won't actually touch Iran and North Korea.

I can't see why America would want to get dragged into the central African war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo without some pay-off like access to the region's mineral resources. That and challenging French influence in Francophone Africa and its proximity to West African oil reserves which the Cheney Report on American energy needs have already laid claim to.

Right now America is too overstretched in Iraq to secure its interests in Central and West Africa by force, although they're trying more friendly strategies like the African Crisis Response Initiative, which involves training regime's security forces and arming them.

arcadegame2004

Well to be fair, Iran is a centre of tyranny. The rigged parliamentary elections, in which thousands of liberals and moderates who support Khatami were banned from standing is a case in point.

While I would be delighted to see the theocrats that run Iran brought down, the chaos that has engulfed post-Saddam Iraq should serve as a warning to the US to tread carefully. Iran has 3 times Iraq's population, after all.

I agree that the US is engaged in hypocrisy with respect to ignoring Israel's nukes, by the way. The Christian Right and the pro-Israel lobby are involved in an unholy alliance to destroy all regimes in the Middle East that are hostile to Israel, which explains the US's position.

sovtek

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The Christian Right and the pro-Israel lobby are involved in an unholy alliance to destroy all regimes in the Middle East that are hostile to Israel which explains the US's position.

...as well as regimes that merely ask that Israel be told to respect international law like everyone else.

p.pete

Hobbes wrote:

Why was it ok for Israel to run a nuclear weapons program and keep it hidden from the inspectors but it isn't for Iran even though they are being open about inspections?

Why is it OK for France or the UK or the US to gain energy from nuclear sources and not Iran?

If it's a question of trust surely the Iranians have no more trust for these countries then they recieve from them...

It's something I've always wondered so if there's a straight-forward and direct answer please let me know

halkar

I think US is causing for the countries to move to Nukes rather than preventing them. They should sit at their side of the world and mind their own bussiness instead of stiring ****.

Ohhh wait, Iran has OIL too!!!

Orizio

With respect to Iran,I think the best solution is if America joins the EU negiotations with Iran.Without the US's support the negiotations are bound to fail.The EU will have to go to the UN where China,the US and Russia will veto them.Then the US can happily say the UN and the EU has failed again.It would be best if Bush gave peace talks a chance and there is time(3 years before Iran get WMD?).Of course that won't happen.According to Hersh,the Pentagons plan is to bomb a half a dozen targets in Iran as Isreal begins to pull out of Gaza and hopefully this will set off a pro-American reaction in Iran.Pretty wishful thinking and luckily the CIA seem to agree.

Anyway,Pakistan is the greatest danger to the area.Whereas Iran is joined to the IAEA,Pakistan isn't and while Iran doesn't have nuclear capabilities,Pakistan does,and continues to top up its stockpiles.Most importantly,Pakistan has a destabilising infleunce in Al-Qeuda and a population that sympathises with Osama.Forget Iran,Pakistan is the real worry...

vedder

Hobbes wrote:

Why was it ok for Israel to run a nuclear weapons program and keep it hidden from the inspectors...

UN inspectors?

Looking more and more US might hit Iran, although how I am not sure. The US population certainly wouldn't be up for it unless there was a very good reason.

The mad mullahs of Iran start their rigged parliament with shouts of "DEATH TO AMERICA". Which would be a pretty good reason if I was an American to give them a good whacking. Or, how about these enlightened young students http://www.payvand.com/news/04/jun/1107.html, the "DEATH TO ISRAEL" is charming or what? Iran to me is a bit like Germany of the 1930's, so lets just hope that the Iranians don't get to create a holocaust.

chewy

come and get me



I dont' really mean it

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Hobbes

vedder wrote:

UN inspectors?

Go read up on it. UN inspectors did in fact go to Israels nuclear power plant, but Israel built a false control room and had the real control room bricked off while they were there so as to ensure the nuclear weapons program was found.

The mad mullahs of Iran start their rigged parliament with shouts of "DEATH TO AMERICA". Which would be a pretty good reason if I was an American to give them a good whacking.

Again, go bother to read up on Iran and why they are shouting that. Here is something to start you off.