Quote from dhpar:
I used the word in a way that is being widely used (whenever you attack another country it is called an overreaction - and that goes even for US, e.g. initial attack of Afghanistan).
Personally I do not think it is an overreaction to nuke them - especially when official Iran doctrine is to wipe Israel off the map.
He also said there was no intention of attacking Israel and Iran was a peace loving country. As a matter of fact Iran has attacked no other country for a long time.
So which do you take to be the truth ? Or is it just propaganda that interests you ?
The only player that has any semblance of objectivity in all of this is the IAEA, and it has reported that it has found no evidence of nuclear materials being diverted to military uses in Iran. The IAEA was right about Iraq in the midst of a flood of lies and propaganda issueing from the US and UK. All the evidence suggests that IAEA inspections are effective in controlling proliferation in countries that have signed up to the NPT. Proliferation has occured in countries that didn't sign up - notably Israel.
The Bush administration does not give a hoot about non-proliferation. It has consistantly attempted to undermine the credability of the IAEA in persuit of its neocon imperial dreams. The point is that Iran is perfectly entitled to enrich nuclear materials for peaceful purposes under the NPT. Destroy the NPT, which is effectively what the current US administration is about, and international control of nuclear weapons will end up in the hands of whatever nut case might be in power in the US at the time. This is the aim of the current US administration. Should it be achieved, the end result is far more likely to be proliferation, than non-proliferation.
Whether Iran will develop nuclear weapons is not known. What is certain is that the more threats that are made against Iran, the more likely it will become.
As a side note, one has to wonder about the current moves by Bush to replace top brass, send more troops to Iraq and the build up of naval and air power in the Gulf. Only an idiot could possibly believe that 10,000, 20,000 or even 50,000 more US troops in Iraq is going to make any real difference to the internal situation in that country. However the change of command and military build up may be a precursor to an attack on Iran. Who knows ?
