Again, that’s pretty much my point–if he wasn’t there it would be much harder to drum up support for war, etc. I truly don’t believe he really represents the mainstream government view in Tehran.
Oh, absolutely. I think we can safely assume that no one save Iran knows whether or not they are actively pursuing nuclear weapons at the moment, and probably quite a few people in Iran aren’t sure, either. That being said…
Har har. This isn’t a replay of 2003. Iran absolutely IS creating weapons-grade fissile material, which is one of the chief roadblocks to creating nuclear weapons. Whether or not they are actually fitting missiles for warheads at the moment, the fact remains that there is no logical reason for them to refine that material save for weapons. If they merely wanted a nuclear power program… well, Russia has a proliferation-safe nuclear plant RIGHT THERE, and Europe has offered similar deals. But no, they want the ability to make their own weapons-grade fuel. This is a very, very dangerous decision, and one that they are making under significant pressure from the world community (and for that matter, from factions within Iran sick of being an international pariah).
So, whether or not they’re a year away, or 5, or 10… they absolutely are on the road. Getting them off that road is still theoretically possible – but given Tehran’s positions, it’s doubtful with the current government. Europe has tried, HARD, and failed.
You’re probably being snarky, but yeah, it is.
I’m not just talking about weapons inspections, but also about the Ahmadinejad-centric view of Iran that has puzzled so many people in this thread. Ahmadinejad is a name the American public recognizes and hates; casting an attack on Iran as an attack against him personally is a strong and well-precedented PR move no matter how simplistic and misleading it is.
Disarmnament is nice in theory, but it only works between nations who have mutual interests and the means to enact sure verification.
Israel: “OK, we’ve put our nukes beyond use.”
Iran: “SUCKERS!” (launch)
Israel: “JOKE’S ON YOU!” (launch)
I thought I was being reasonably careful about that. In any event Khameini is just as warmongering as Ahmadinejad, merely not as wacky with the anti-semitism.
Ahmadinejad is crazy enough to worry about, though. Iranians worry that he really does believe the 12th Imam is coming. Like, tomorrow. He may not have a whole lot of de jure power but he represents a pretty powerful faction in Iranian politics, the “basij”, or fundamentalist paramilitiaries that a decade ago mostly died a lot in human wave attacks vs. Iraq. Iranian politics is fairly opaque even to Iranians; assuming Ahmadinejad is all talk and little bite can be a dangerous assumption if it’s a Basiji running the missile program.
Bush is crazy enough to worry about, though. Americans worry that he really does believe the Rapture is coming. Like, tomorrow.
And in Iran, the kids just wanna party like it’s 1399.
Pfft, he’s a Methodist (and rumored Catholic convert post-office). Contrary to popular conception the majority of the world’s Christians are not premillenial-dispensationalists.
And in America, the leaders just wanna party like it’s 1899.
Edit: Linoleum: He talks to God. That’s a little too crazy for me.
They want to party with the Timurids?
I don’t think talking to god is scary. It’s when god talks back that it becomes scary.
Booo!
That bad of a joke?
That is some scary crap. However, a world leader attending a religious service is a pretty normal thing to do from what I have observed.
Hersh’s article is especially interesting to read in light of this piece by Spencer Ackerman, which examines the CIA within the context of American imperialism.
That is one damn good article.