Yes the West will always stand by Iran not stand up to Iran. Israel, stop the crap about Iran as you are both great friends.

Iran has a natural right to harness nuclear technology, even for military purposes. Indeed, if Israel had the right to possess and stockpile hundreds of nuclear warheads, that are being trained at Muslim cities such as Cairo, Istanbul, Tehran and Damascus and probably Mecca and Medina as well, why on earth would Muslim states such as Iran, Egypt and Saudi Arabia not have such a right? After all, are Jewish nuclear bombs kosher?

Why would Europe or the US be in danger if Iran has nukes? The only country in danger is Israel and not even them. Its called MAD (mutually assured destruction). If Israel gets to have 200 nukes so should iran. Unless Israel gives up their nukes your not gonna stop Iran's nuclear ambitions

This may be news to Gabriel Calabrese because he probably doesn't read much except his own BS. The other piece of news for Gabriel is the West has decided it needs Iran and can work with it. The one the West is fed up with the Israel and its extremist, racist policies that create instability for everyone. Israel's "secret" nukes are a clear and present danger to the ME and beyond, while Iran's nuclear program is legal, open and under constant monitoring by the authorized international body. In short the "international community" HAS made a choice and that is Iran is in the clear. Some may not like this but the Calabreses of this world can collectively such an egg.

You say that Iran want to act as regional power if not a world power, what is it about them being a regional power that is a threat to the world. As for existential threat to Israel, I am not convinced. On theone hand you say they have been consistent in trying to become a power, but doesn't that imply that you and the west can live with that. At what point did Iran become an existential threat to Israel in 1979 or in 2008? Is it a threat to Israel because its nuclear program destroys the nuclear monopoly or because they will attack Israel with nuclear weapons? If it is latter, then why didn't they attack Israel when the Cold War was going on and they had Soviet protection? If America must go to war to protect Israel from "existential threats", we should at least be told what the threat is, because I cannot recall in the last 30 years when Israel was attacked from Iranian territory where these nukes are going to be located.

Clearly on the basis of the U.S telling Israel it cannot attack Iran the answer is an unmitigated "No". If Israel does not stand up for itself you can be sure than the U.S never will and cannot ever be depended on. Recent examples of U.S abandonment: Georgia, Vietnam, Somalia and Iraq if Obama gets in. Israel should do a "Begin". It would be harder but not impossible with Iran. If not Heaven help us !

Since early summer, IRGC commander-in-chief, Mohammad-Ali (Aziz) Jafari, has started to implement sweeping changes within the IRGC. They characterize the most significant and unprecedented changes since the 1985 order by Rohallah Khomeini to equip the IRGC with an air force and a navy in addition to its ground forces. In the course of these extensive changes, the IRGC will shift focus from being a centralized force to having 31 distinct provincial brigades, the commanders of which will be given wide-ranging discretions. Each of the 30 provinces in Iran will have an IRGC brigade. Tehran will be the only province with two brigades (31 brigades in total across the country). So far 20 of the 31 provincial commanders have been appointed to their posts, and the appointment of the rest is currently underway. Additionally, each brigade would also include a mullah to represent the interests of the regime’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. Most of the 20 appointed commanders are second-tier brigadier generals. This indicates that the higher ranking commanders (with more previous experience) have been replaced by lower ranking officers. The representation of the regime’s Supreme Leader at the IRGC has also been given a higher profile. Supreme Leader representation now includes a deputy, a coordinator, and a headquarters in Tehran, as well as representatives embedded in each provincial brigade, each with his own headquarters established in the province. Reasons for the shift After the regime began to close its ranks and conduct internal purges, and thus adopted a so-called one-legged political posture following Ahmadinejad’s ascent to power, on August 21, 2005, Khamenei issued an order for the creation of an IRGC Research and Command Center, with Mohammad-Ali Jafari as its coordinator. This was done in the course of crafting the desired strategy effectively conforming to the regime’s newly attained one-legged stance. In accordance with Khamenei’s orders, Jafari issued an unveiled threat by claiming, “If the enemy were to wage an attack against us, we would threaten its interests all over the world.” The pertinent factors and the basis for the new strategy During the past two years, the IRGC outlined the fundamentals of the new strategy, whose main tenets include: • To terrorize and instill fear among the Iranian populace; • To conduct terrorist operations against the regime’s perceived enemies, even in the latter’s own countries; and • To obtain a nuclear bomb, considered to be the most vital element for the regime’s stability and consolidation of power. This objective has only been discussed within the regime’s private circles. The appointment of Jafari as the IRGC commander-in-chief In an order issued on September 1, 2007, Khamenei promoted Jafari, then-coordinator of the IRGC Research and Command Center, to the rank of major general and also appointed him to the post of commander-in-chief of the IRGC. His main mandate was to implement the newly crafted strategy within the IRGC. On October 20, 2007, in his first official speech as the IRGC commander-in-chief, Jafari talked about the new strategy and stated, “Based on the guidelines issued by the Leader of the Islamic Republic, the strategy of the IRGC has been modified. Its main task now is to confront internal threats.” He went on to say, “Maintaining internal security normally lies within the purview of the State Security Forces and other security organs. However, if the magnitude of security challenges were to cross a certain threshold, with the permission of the Leader and the Supreme National Security Council, the IRGC would have to take overall charge of the situation.” The IRGC’s new commander-in-chief also indicated that the two vital objectives for his forces would be: First, having up-to-date intelligence about the perceived enemy’s movements and activities, and second, increasing the regime’s missile capabilities.

I feel I must apologize for Leon's uninformed rant. Obviously he is a product of the failing public education system here in the US. First, Iran did not enjoy Russian protection until after the Ayatollahs took over. Even then the "protection" has been conditional. Russia wants Iran as an irritant and threat to the US and Israel as this furthers Russia's objectives in Central Asia and the Middle East. Second, Iran does not at this point, nor at any point in its past has it had nuclear weapons. Given Iranian rhetoric and the fanatical religous beliefs of the Iranian leadership it would be a good idea to keep nuclear weapons out of Iranian hands. Third, even assuming Israel is a nuclear power I would refer to the amazing restraint Israel has exercised. Even in 1973, when it appeared that Syrian forces were about to break into Israel from the Golan and when Egyptian forces seemed to be advancing without meeting meaningful resistence, Israel did not resort to the nuclear option. I doubt if the roles were reversed that Iran, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Libya, or any other Muslim nation would show such restraint. Fourth, Leon, what part of "Death to America" are you incapable of understanding?

Why should Israel be allowed to posses weapons of mass destruction while others in the area are not? If Israel has security concerns, Isnt everyone else entitled to have their own security concerns as well? Or are the Israeli Nukes exempt from scrutiny because they are "The chosen ones"?

A regime motivated by an insane ideology of hatred cannot be stopped by policies of appeasement. It will not be stopped by any deterence. It can only be stopped militarily. World leaders followed the same appeasement policies towards Hitler & the Nazis in the 1930's & we can all see how successful that was. Today's Iran is no different.

The news of a senior U.S. envoy at the Geneva talks with Iranian negotiators could hardly count as a "groundbreaking policy shift" capable of ending the nuclear row with Tehran. Only a week after the talks, the Iranian regime raised the stakes by trumpeting the expansion of its enrichment program, underscoring the futility of the diplomatic push before it even got off the ground. This was another sad outcome of a profoundly counterproductive and inconsistent three-decade-old policy, which, if continued unabated by the West, has all the makings of a potential catastrophe an Iran bomb or a bombing of Iran. Before sending its envoy to Geneva, the State Department promised that he would only be there "listening," not talking – as if more talking to the Iranian regime could improve the situation. However, the move was widely seen as yet another bold concession to an increasingly belligerent regime, which has not backed away even faintly from its threatening rhetoric, its defiance of the international community, and its killing of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan. If anything, Iran's destructive meddling in both those countries, however, is a plain testament to the folly of talking to Tehran. The European nuclear negotiations have not fared any better. Recently, France's foreign minister provided a sensible account of their outcome, saying, "I have talked for a long time with the Iranians, many hours. … There was nothing fundamental that was advancing. We will continue but I have to say we have already tried very hard." Indeed, the mullahs have shown to be incredibly adept at using the last five years of negotiations to perfect their enrichment program, which now has nearly 6,000 spinning centrifuges

There is no doubt that Iran is the greatest national security threat to the state of Israel. Two nuclear bombs would destroy Israel. Given the overwhelming amount of evidence, anyone who doubts that Iran is actively seeking technology to build nuclear weapons is simply delusional. Those who believe the Iranian regime is willing to forgo what it sees as the divinely inspired mission of eliminating Israel are, at best, dangerously naïve. Those who think Iranian leaders are more worried about survival than reaching paradise and attaining Islam’s ultimate victory, are not listening with open ears. All too many Westerners fall prey to the soft bigotry that presumes men like Ahmadinejad are incapable of saying what they mean and meaning what they say. The West should wake up: http://tinyurl.com/4svgto

Israel cannot depend on the West. Israel alone has the expertise,experience, capability and the track record of defending itself against those who threaten its existence.

Then the bombs will start destroying Irans facilities. The Iranians are stupid if they think Bush isn't going to destroy their nuclear facilities. You'll hear them yapping for all kinds of compromise once the bombs start falling.

to bait them into a war. She told them not to attack back after being provoked. Russia always intended on invading.....they started the fight and then howled about the poor oppressed people that were attacked after the provocation. We aren't going to send in a military force into Georgia when we have a plan to take out Iran's facilities already in place. They can't afford to many wars at the same time. It wouldn't suprise anyone if the Russians wanted us in Georgia to delay any attack on Iran. Keep them busy over here so they don't take care of a problem over there. We take care of our pipeline in Georgia, while Russia takes care of business in Iran.

Let alone, a nuclear device. We don't want anything to do with Iran. Your involvement in the barracks bombing in Beirut as well as the fun little hostage game in 1979 to 1980 clinched our desire to deal with you. What have you got to offer besides terrorism and a few buckets of oil?

...again and again. Thess events have "1938" written all over them. On the assumption that the authors of comments #1-#5 understand this, they have clearly stated how they feel about Israel and Jews---not about whether the West should stand up to Iran.

You say that Iran will have a nulear bomb next year?? I say AMEN!

The early talkback is what virtual chat rooms call a 'room raid'. A group persuing its agenda on others. Wouldnt suprise me if theyre on Irans payroll. Clearly any non Jihadist sees the danger Iran poses to the West and others. Recently a new show hit British TV called Spooks Code 9. A sort of spin off the succesful Spooks TV series. This new series is a pale example of the original but its to its content that I wish to address. The scenario places the series in 2012 after London was hit with a nuclear device killing hundreds of thousands and rendering London uninhabitable and evacuated. The point I wish to make is that, that which would have been unimaginable 20, 40 yrs ago is not so today. To contemplate even such a scenario is the result of seeing third world rogue states aquiring nuclear capabilities as we see today. The issue with Iran is that it need not send missiles clearly marked by sattelite from their territory. But as a major sponsor of terrorists world wide is more then capable of having its proxies carry out its dirty work whilst feigning innocense. End result major capital cities of the west hit by nuclear smuggled across its borders by proxies. This scenario has already entered the psyche of common citizens of the west. The result is the simple repeat of pre WW2. Allowing dangerous dictators dictate the agenda and as WW2 resulting in a staggering 80 million deaths aprox. Only this time with the appeasement of the west we may see that figure decimate world population. Perhaps if civilisation as we know it refuses to learn from history are not just doomed to repeat the same mistakes but deserve its consequences. Ironically with the above scenario, arab or muslim civilisation will finally have brought about its own demise and extinction from the planet, for they most certainly will not go unscathed by the above scenario. Who knows perhaps we need Iran to go nuclear to finally end Islams war on the world that it has been raging for centuries. But at what cost to ourselves?

Here in Europe we face muslim extremism everyday, and it's not getting any better... European ambiguous speech about that problem (well, I can understand them, they feel guilty about those poor guys and they need oil, isn't that human?) isn't helping.

Why does a small country like Israel ("occupied Palestine") need 250 nuclear war heads, and ever since its creation is contantly attacking its neighbours. Is it right that Jews who have property and money from abroad come to Israel and force the occupants out making them homeless and consequently refugees? israel is a threat to the whole world!

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2008/gov2008-15.pdf is what they are ACTUALLY saying and remember this is an agency that has never succeeded in stopping someone getting weapons.

as opposed to constantly having been attacked?

you will be the first to blow away you ignorant

I wouldn't get to excited.

There was not a human to be seen for miles. These people that you are saying are being displaced, have shown up because of uncontrolled procreation which has created this problem to begin with. They were never displaced by other Jews. They were birthed into a little strip of land called Gaza. How about addressing all the Arabs that have invaded Europe and the United States forcing their occupants out of their neighborhoods. And address all the Jobs they take from Europeans and American citizens. If this is really your bogus argument, then apply it to your so called underpriveledged Arab friends. Friends who come from much bigger countries and displace Jews in the United States and Europe. And how about addressing Europe for displacing the Jews through Genocide to begin with. I don't see you beating on Poland or Germanies doorstep, offering the Jews their land back. There is plenty of displacing going on from all nations. The 12 million Jews don't have a lock on that by a long shot. It's a bogus argument on your part. Admitting you just don't like Jews goes a lot further.

I am glad to see such a well thought out analysis of the situation. You are absolutely correct in your historical and future perspectives. If we allow Iran to procede, God help us all!

You say - Iranian diplomats have evaded every opportunity to modify its program or to fulfill its international responsibility as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. Very strange. The IAEA, which is charged with monitoring Iran's nuclear program says that Iran is in full compliance. Under Article IV of the NPT, Iran has the INALIENABLE RIGHT to enrich uranium. That means that NOBODY has the right to stop Iran from conducting this activity. Therefore, Iran's nuclear activity is quite legal and any efforts to coerce Iran into abrogating its rights are ILLEGAL. Iran is quite correct to completely ignore such coercion. The USA has no moral or legal ground to oppose Iran, because the USA has not adhered to the NPT from Day 1. Israel has not even signed the NPT and has an undeclared nuclear arsenal. So go away and leave Iran alone, you pack of hypocrites.