A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Someone, somewhere, CT — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:37:16 GMT

The sooner the U.S. normalizes relations with Iran the better. Forget the past. Think of the future!!!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Fred H, Louisville,Ky — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:54:08 GMT

Sooner or later this is an issue that will have to be dealt with. Diplomacy will not work with Iran. They are buying time and it is working in their favor....the longer they are left to do as they please, the harder it will be for the world to put an end to their quest for a nuclear Iran.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Richard, Los Angeles — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:57:40 GMT

We will be attacking Iran because that's what Israel wants. Our country is no longer ours. The U.S. capital is in Tel Aviv.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Ross, Toronto, Ontario — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:05:56 GMT

Miltary action? What military action. That is the one thing that has not been tried.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

CAPPYHAMPER — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:28:32 GMT

I thought this country had a policy of not dealing
or negotiating with terrorists. Iran is a rogue
terrorist state. End of story. If I were in the oval office, I'd get our troops our of Iraq and Afghanistan and let Iran know in very simple terms -stop uranium enrichment or we'll enrich it for you - all in one fell swoop. Attack Israel - we'll turn Tehran into a big old glass landing strip for our pilotless drones.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

dave, southgate,michigan — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:43:36 GMT

it is foolish to even consider this avenue...thier aim is to destroy us and only that.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

nahid shafiei — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:51:40 GMT

For the past 30 years the U.S. has pondered and tried everything: regime change, covert operations, military action, containment, sanctions, threats, bullying, membership in "axis of evil" club, etc. etc. Now that there is nothing left in U.S.'s "tool box", how about giving a big, proud, nation with a long history its due respect and status and sitting down with it as "equal partners" and discussing EVERYTHING without setting pre-conditions. If U.S. attitude of talking to Iran as if it is its "colony" or its "inferior" does not change neither Clinton, nor Obama, nor the next 10 U.S. presidents will be able to deal with Iran. Just read Iran's modern history with the west and you'll realize the futility of trying to "scare" Iran into doing anything.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

jorge — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:02:00 GMT

We can't attack Iran, we're still hurting from Iraq and we're sending every available soldier to Afghanistan. Thank Bush for that.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Curt Hodapp, Kansas City, MO — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:03:23 GMT

Why should we do anything? What do they bring to the table? Oil? Right now there is a glut of oil and we still are able to get their oil through 3rd parties. Therefore, what is in it for us?

Remember, these are the same people who took Americans hostage in the late 70's. They want to do nothing more than distroy us at all cost. Therefore, why should we do anything?

If they want to pick a fight, we have the reach to smack them around (if needed). Therefore, what is in it for us?

Let the EU and the UN talk to them about disarming their nuclear labs. If they strike us, we will release the full power of the US against them.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Tim — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:05:39 GMT

How long is the distrust between our two nations going to be cultivated by people that are scared? It's obvious that we blew it by going into Iraq. We invaded a culture that hates us, even though we are helping to "liberate" them from the forces of Sadam/terrorists and make them normal, democratic. Just like us. Why do we have to make other counties be like us? I don't get it. Hitler tried it, didn't work. Now we are trying it in Iraq, and it's not working. Iran has every right to be afraid of us. We are invading their culture. Yes, I agree it's a culture that seems barbaric, but it's their culture and they have to deal with it. I'm sick of being the worlds "moral" police. To many of our troops are giving their lives for the war machine and gettin nothing back for it.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Charles, Reno, NV — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:11:33 GMT

There will never be peace with Iran. Israel and AIPAC will never allow it. As long as we are slaves to them, the U.S. will never have normalized relations with the Mid-East.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Keith Burnett, St. Petersburg, FL — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:15:36 GMT

Few people realize how easy it is to stop Iran's Nuclear program. We do know the general vicinity in which they are doing this work, and while they may have hidden the centrifuges below ground, they have not hidden the power plant than supply the power to run them. Several thousand centrifuges are required, and each consumes upards of 200 KW of power - over 200 megawatts total. If you take out the power plants you stop the program - no troops required. One card we should play diplomatically is that if they don't suspend the program, we are going to force them to do so.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

mike petrosian — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:24:08 GMT

It is up to the jews politicions in u.s. to make
peace with iran or not.They make the most desisions
on wars. The u.s. is more concern
about isreal then about america and this will
go on for a long time. Isreal is powerfull country
to take care of it self, we do not need to interfer.
The AIPAC must leav america now....

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

RicInCt Bridgeport Ct — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:25:37 GMT

The only effective long term solution is the same as that applied to "Yugoslavia" when we dealt with Serbia. Iranians make up only 60% of the population. The Kurds and Baluchs would certainly welcome independence from Tehran and the Arabs of Khuzestan deserve a free and open plebiscite to decide if they would prefer independence on the level of Kuwait or unification with Iraq. Iran will be a constant threat..just as Serbia was in the Balkans..until they are reduced in territory and power.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

dtrimmer, vail colorado — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:30:18 GMT

The best way to make change in Iran is thru the people not the government. Israel has made choices on their own without taking into consideration they helpped take the land from the rightful owners to begin with. They also need to make changes and stop with their aggression on peaceful civilians. they only stoke the fire. sometimes you have to let go of things you believe in to receive freedom and peace.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

John, Lawrenceville, VA — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:35:04 GMT

Iran could never threaten the U.S. We should stop giving Iran a reason to hate the U.S. by encouraging real peace in the Middle East and by supporting a cease fire.
I think Obama's policy towards Iran will be the same as Bush's. Bush has already engaged in low level negotiations. By the way, why does Israel get to use chemical weapons against the Palestinians like white phosphorus? I am against using violence as a deterrent: radical Islam and the U.S. have one thing in common--both think violence is a deterrent.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

micha fillmore,ca — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:40:29 GMT

Iran is a great place to have friends, but logic points to the fact that Israel our friend is on the Iranian hit-list... we can only be as friendly as allowed to be. If Iran goes after Israel then my family and I will have to encourage America to help Iseral... and our history for doing the right things to protect our friends.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Jay, New York, NY — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:40:32 GMT

Anyone who thinks diplomacy will not work with Iran should look at Libya. Remember how they were considered enemy #1? A nation of terrorists? Remember how evil Gaddafi was thought to be? They're not our friend and certainly Gaddafi's no saint, but at least there is a relationship based on open, reasonable dialogue. Anyone who believes Ahmedenejahd's retoric is a permanent part of Iranian policy knows nothing about the Iranian government, it's people, or it's history. Thankfully, the days of pointless wars that destroy America's military, economy, and credibility are over. Real patriots understand that America's military should be respected and the lives or our soldiers should not be squandered by liars (WMD's anyone?) and war profiteers.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Richard, NY,NY — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:46:14 GMT

I'm in no favor of a nuclear Iran, but if we have a Nuclear India & Pakistan (how did that happen) then how are we to stop them. Diplomacy and World preassure is the way to go.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Tiger — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:55:17 GMT

Forget about Iran. Let them develop their nuclear weapons. But make it perfectly clear to them that if they, any other country, or terrorist organization uses nuclear weapons suspected to have been produced by Iran on the U.S. or any other country , the U.S. will hold them responsible and will retalliate in a manner that Iran cannot even begin to dream about, i.e. a massive nuclear attact on their country.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Alil, Citizen of the World. — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:59:30 GMT

Sooner or later this is an issue that will have to be dealt with. Diplomacy will not work with the United States. They are buying time and it is working in their favor....the longer they are left to do as they please, the harder it will be for the world to put an end to their quest for an American conquest of the world.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

DF, Chicago IL — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:02:39 GMT

It sure is interesting how many comments here are all about STILL (falsely) thinking we can "scare" Iran or "bomb them" willy-nilly.

Have you people ever stopped to consider that we've tried all of that for the last 30 years, and it's gotten us, ummm... nowhere?

Sheesh. THINK, people. THINK.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Fred Quinter — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:03:32 GMT

They are going to get their 'nukes, we know that,there's no good way to stop them. So who cares? What counts is what they do with them. If they threathen their neighbors we'll make a fortune selling arms to everyone in the region and the whole trade deficit thing will be solved in no time. If they just sit on them or make a lot of noise but no action, we can sell arms to everyone in the region and the trade deficit thing will be solved in no time.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

HappyCamper, LA, California — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:06:23 GMT

"...If I were in the oval office...we'll turn Tehran into a big old glass landing strip for our pilotless drones." Maybe, that's why you're not in the Oval office!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Marine Grunt — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:14:27 GMT

Richard LA- you are on target!! The US attacking Iran is acting by proxy for israel again. we are in Iraq for the same reason over 4000 Americans and ten of thousands Iraqis died for israel. Americans we better wake up!! our foreign policy in the ME is dictated not in DC but in Tel Aviv!!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Phillip, Nashville, TN — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:16:23 GMT

The world needs to make some priority changes. If world governments would quit trying to interfere with each other, cooperate, and try to educate each other instead of fuel religious disputes, the human race would be unstoppable. The beauty of a diverse world is that people can move from country to country depending on how they wish to be governed. So conflict and disputes aren't getting us anywhere. If we had accomplished this long ago we could have terraformed Mars by now. I don't know about you guys but who doesn't think it would be cool to vacation on Mars, the Moon or even a ski trip on Jupiters moon Europa. Unfortunately religious differences have kept us grounded and will continue to if we don't try these "new approaches".

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Scottsdale Jack — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:31:04 GMT

Contrary to the neocon propaganda spewed forth in the media on a daily basis, Iran has not attacked another country in over 200 years. Yet they are widely considered to be some kind of threat. Why? Because the Israelis are scared to death of losing their military advantage over their neighbors.

If Iran had nukes, Israel might not be so fast to attack its neighbors and the thing they fear most (a Cold War style peace) might break out.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Ivan, Houston, TX — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:34:56 GMT

There will never be peace with Iran so long as radical theocrats subscribe to the notion of eradicating Israel, suppling terrorists to attack American interests and developing a nuclear arsenal. There has to be peace within Iran before there is peace with Iran. Obama will find out what every other U.S. President has... there is no peaceful solution to an antogonistic Iran.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Frank Howard — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:39:25 GMT

It appears that many folks posting here are not quite up with Radical Islam (a term to which Iran definitely qualifies). The Koran says the entire world will once again be ruled by Islam. No ifs, ands, or buts. All non-Islams are infidels and must be destroyed. The current political leader of Iran said Isreal should be wiped off the map. You can't "engage" these people. Even as biased as the author is, he knows it won't happen. He said "But what we MIGHT see- if the political stars align." Yeah, right...

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

betz, phoenix, az — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:43:18 GMT

Stop the foreign policy hypocrisy. Israel pre-emptively invades their neighbors, Iran does not. Demonizing and warmongering for Iran to protect Israel is wrong.

The Iran 'issue' is 100% Israeli. Unlike Iran, Israel simply has too much to hide and wants to keep it that way. When is Israel going to sign the NNPT and allow IAEA inspections ?

Israel and the US want Iranian nuclear transparency? Then Israel better be just as transparent.

America's silence about Israelis nuclear weapons with the latter's lack of membership to the NPT while maintaining such harsh rhetoric with regard to Iran's nuclear program, which is legally allowed to enrich uranium as a NPT member is an example of the kind of outright double standard that the United States has been following in its foreign policy. Pure BS.

Israel has its own nuclear arsenals and they are the biggest recipient of our aid in the world. The world has condemned Israeli behavior with almost 200 UN resolutions which Israel chooses to ignore, with US backing.

Why on earth is Israel, a rogue nuclear state allowed to lay waste to every international law and convention without criticism and their "enemies" - read Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Hamas - anyone who opposes Israel's failed, belligerent, apartheid aggressive policies - are not entitled to raise a hand in their own defense ?

Cut the billions of dollars we give them each year, we need the money here at home, not financing another war for the 'security' of our biggest welfare client.

Why on earth is Israel, a rogue nuclear state allowed to lay waste to every international law and convention without criticism and their "enemies" - read Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Hamas - anyone who opposes Israel's failed, belligerent, apartheid aggressive policies - are not entitled to raise a hand in their own defense ?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

C Scott Brown Overland Park, KS — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:44:45 GMT

Most of you are missing the point here. Who cares about Iran. We have enough problems of our own. That society has been around for 3000 years and ours 260. As far as being "Moral" Police our country has lost it's morals. Just look at the fact that we torture people and then condemn others for doing the same. Hypocrits that is what we have here. My Family has had a member fight in every war this country has ever waged including myself in Desert Storm and Iraqi freedom and I can say this is not the same country any more. The point is let Iran have Nukes. Hell let them all have Nukes and then you will have peace in the middle east on way or another. We have a defence system that can intercept and destroy missiles before they get to us anyway.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

HOSAINI .YEHRAN I.R.IRAN. — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:47:39 GMT

obama is more foolish than THE bush if enter to atake with iran.because i.r.iran is most power than 30years before.and midle east will be a hard graVE FOR U.S.AMERICA.THEN YOU MUST THINK ABOUT IT.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Steve Dobkowski, Jr. Dearborn, Mi. — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:49:05 GMT

The one person Obama should not send to Iran to visit with the leadership of Iran is Jimmy Carter. Carter caused the problem by refusing to heed the advice of the CIA to close the US Embassy in 1979.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

don magnus — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:54:23 GMT

most Americans are sick of our trying to police the world. Let the world chose their own form of government. Should they chose a perverted form of religeous reign, or totally open anarchism, let us but out and send all our money will it will do the most good, within our own borders. It has always been the "rescue" attitude which has gotten us so criticized...damned if you do, damned if you don't...I'll take the latter.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Dan N — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:01:55 GMT

Diplomacy would require that Iran wants something from us. They do not. They want time to develop a nuclear program..period. They trade with China and Russia. Iran's leaders use, to great advantage, the US and Isreal as an excuse to it's people for its failures to evolve into a developed nation, which many in Iran have tasted and desire. The time ness to develop nuclear power is best gained by...diplomacy. So clearly, Iran will be motivated to have us engage in diplomacy. Just so we understand the price of engagement...

It is correct that other strategies have not worked well..we fail to isolate them because of Russia and China. They supply refined gasoline and essential technology. We all supply the capital by paying over $60 barrell for oil. We have limited leverage with Russia and China so we cannot compell them to do anything..unless we hand over the Balken states. A targeted military strike is likely to fail as our intell is not complete and would spark a thousand Hezbollah suicide strikes, some in the US. They would still continue to bleed us with Iraq Shiite, Hezbollah, and Hamas "pawn" surrogates.

So, I am forced to conclude that Obama will proceed with engagement, and Iran will acquire nuclear weapons. They will not directly use them however as they know they would be vaporized. The main Q becomes will Iran attempt to transfer the nuclear tech to surrogates in the hopes they can hit without blowback to Iran. In this case, our best defense is to send a clear message that blowback will occur. Words mean little without action so by making sure we have a clear victory in Afganistan. After all, this is the "blowback" for Al-Qaeda using Afganistan as a base to train. This is the type of "engagement" that I would tell Hillary to focus on..

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

A Jaff, Florida — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:05:42 GMT

Everybody NEEDS TO READ "All the Shah's Men" by Stephen Kinzer, and you will understand the root of all this crisis in the Mid East, and Iran.

The US/England started the trouble by using Kermit Roosevelt and his goons to bribe weak minded Iranian officials internally, as well as mobs full of thugs to wreak havoc in the country. Remember the day of August 19, 1953 anyone?????? If you learn about it, then you can figure out why the Iranian ppl distrust the Western nations who supported an oppressive tyrannical dictator in Reza Shah for 25 years because of the aggressive imperialistic minded politicians in England. Truman, rightfully, didn't want to interfere in Iranian politics, but Eisenhower bent over for Churchill and his crew. The Anglo-Iranian Oil (a.k.a BP of today) company was robbing the Iranian nation of its own resources, while the people in Iran were among the poorest people on the PLANET!!!

The American hostage crisis occurred because the Iranian people just revolted against an oppressive regime and, rightfully so, did not want Westerners to interfere once again in their politics.

Learn the facts people, hopefully this opened someone's eyes to the true facts of Iranian history that is arrogantly ignored.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

acc, Houston, TX — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:10:56 GMT

Man I am sick of hearing about you people not caring of what happens in the middle east! Last time we didnt care was in Clinton's years and look what happened, it seems most of you have forgotten 9/11! Iran is harboring terrorist and they are trying to build nuclear so they can do what? instead of the world trade center being destroyed it will probably be an entire city!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Frank M, San Francisco, CA — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:21:04 GMT

Why do people keep reffering to what happened in the 70's as a catalyst to prove the "barbaric" behavior of Iran. How soon we forget the Shah and all of the horrors he perpetrated on the Iranian people. We helped the Shah gain power. We trained his secret police who used those practices to torture and massacre tens of thousands of Iranians. We sold arms and trained his military while the quality of life for many Iranians under his rule was dreadful at best.

Finally a revolution took place with the help of many disenfranchised Iranians to change the conditions of living in that Nation. Regardless of how you feel about the Merits of that Revolution, it was born from the terrors we financially and militarily supported.

It was from this history that some roots of "terrorism" was created. Of course the people we see as terrorist are "freedom fighters" in the eyes of the average Iranian. Why? because a history of suppression and oppression has tainted the world view of every person who has grown up in that environment due to the direct influence and actions of our own Government.

We supported the regime of Saddam Hussein militarily and financially during the Iran/Iraq war creating further distrust and animosity. A decision which emblostered two additional wars in the years to come where are own soldiers were put in harms way for greed and political ideology.

Then we wonder why these nations are skeptical about our motives? We wonder out loud arrogantly, why would they want to set up armies that are unfriendly. We wonder why they would love nothing more then to see us destablized as a world power. If we were destabilized then we might not commit the same crimes against them that we created in the past.

Grow up America... learn your history and put into perspective why these things are happening and what is the history that colors these beliefs.

More strong arming, abusing and exploiting of these Nations will not change a thing but instead will bread more resistance, war and hate.

Diplomacy, respect and a true willingness and effort to help others will bring us much further then hate and fear which dripping throughout this thread.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Fred — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:23:17 GMT

We can't make friends with Iran because Israel wants us to stay enemies.

American interests are no longer determined in Washington, but in Tel Aviv.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

I.K. sacramento ca — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:25:43 GMT

If another country conspired to overthrow our democratically elected president (mossadegh 1953), sold weapons to an enemy that was using WMD against us (Saddam Hussein in the 80's) had troops on both sides of our country and made it an official policy to overthrow our govt yet again, do you really think we wouldn't be developing nuclear weapons?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Jared, from what's left of America... Thanks GDub! — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:41:30 GMT

Ever notice how religion is the root of all things "evil" that have happened on this earth? I wonder what Jesus, Muhammed, and Buddha would think about all of the killing in their names?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

abdulla ,florida — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:45:08 GMT

a nuclear strike would take care of that
problem and finally give them a real reason
to hate the United States.Its the only way
that part of the would finally get a clue

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Bonzzi,St Cl Shores.Michigan — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:51:21 GMT

Leave the decisions to The U.S.A military Generals,If General Patton was our leader he would end all of the problems.
Politics are the cause of wars they start them then they don't end them.Quit playing games,start up the draft and wipe Iran off the map and take Its partners along.And ask Israel if they would help us...if we're lucky they might.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

don — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:53:45 GMT

nahid shafiei
Iran is no equal partner to America. not even close

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Jion Siamak Beverly Hills, CA — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:58:05 GMT

Courage is a scare commodity in the world these days. The US power is coming up against the "rise of the rest." It is so clear that sovereign nations are taking nation's rights seriously. "Give me liberty or death." Patrick Henry Freedom to do within the rule of law is the maxim. Iran is exercising that right. A perfect solution would be a nuclear weapon free world. Let's get there first before we condemn others.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Norman Robbins, Cleveland, OH — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:59:51 GMT

Many comments so far assume that the media and US-Israeli government statements about Iran are true. For instance, Clinton’s testimony that she wants to end Iran’s “nuclear weapons program” contrasts with the best information, the NIE report of November 2007 and all recent IAEA reports, that find no definite evidence of a current weapons program. We simply don’t know Iran’s intentions. We need to use diplomacy to develop options which will assure the US and Israel that Iran’s nuclear program is verifiably not weapons-oriented. Why isn’t the media and Clinton discussing such options, e.g. (www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/03/opinion/edluers.php?page=2)?
As for attacking Iran, most expert analyses of the worst case scenario, say that it could stimulate a true Iranian nuclear crash program as well as cause even more chaos in the world economy, sacrifice lives of more Americans and increase terrorism. On the other hand, we have much to gain from diplomacy in areas of mutual interest – stabilizing Iraq, defeating the Taliban, and interdicting drug traffic. The worry is that Clinton and her so-called Middle East experts are so wedded to the past, that simply talking to the Iranians will never get to exploring these productive opportunities.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Kiumars, Tehran, Iran — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:00:03 GMT

The NBC News Producer who produced this article is actually in Iran?
Iran must be a free country for this guy to brag all these anti-Iranian carp! Imagine he was living in the USA and said a fraction of this! He would have been incarcerated by the administration and the Jewish media like Fox news and all those Jewish lobbies!
Long Live Iran, death to enemies of Iran.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Kiumars, Tehran, Iran — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:04:42 GMT

To: Keith Burnett, St. Petersburg, FL;
Iran produces over 50,000 MW of electricity, 200 MW is a peanut for Iran!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Kiumars, Tehran, Iran — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:12:42 GMT

You can post comments on Press TV without being moderated (i.e. censored)? Is Press TV freer than MSNBC? It seems to be!
Long Live Iran.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

freddy the freeloader — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:02:24 GMT

Sorry folks I don't believe for a minute Iran wants talks,just stalling!REMEMBER that moron Biden saying "he'll be tested" this is only round one!Good luck to us.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Ray Pimentel, San Jose, CA — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:07:41 GMT

Excuse me, guess it's because I'm from the WW 2 generation, but the towering arrogance in some of the comments here just blows me away. Since when does the USA have the divine right to tell Iran what it can and can't do? And I cringe at the words of Hillary C. in her confirmation hearing that "all options are open" re our relations with Iran. Has this country gone stark raving mad? Or at least completely blind to reality? Why are we not threatening Israel, Pakistan, and India with annihilation unless they cease and desist from all nuclear weapons research and development? Why is Iran less entitled to do so than other states that surround it? And lastly, I find the enthusiasm (in the previous comments) for the bombing of other countries by our military sickening. Ever wonder why the rest of the world has come to loath and fear the US?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

betz,phoenix,az — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:10:55 GMT

Stop the foreign policy hypocrisy. Israel pre-emptively invades their neighbors, Iran does not. Demonizing and warmongering for Iran to protect Israel is wrong.

The Iran 'issue' is 100% Israeli. Unlike Iran, Israel simply has too much to hide and wants to keep it that way. When is Israel going to sign the NNPT and allow IAEA inspections ?

Israel wants Iranian nuclear transparency?
Then Israel better be just as transparent.

America's silence about Israelis nuclear weapons with the latter's lack of membership to the NPT while maintaining such harsh rhetoric with regard to Iran's nuclear program, which is legally allowed to enrich uranium as a NPT member is an example of the kind of outright double standard that the United States has been following in its foreign policy. Pure BS.

Israel has its own nuclear arsenals and they are the biggest recipient of our aid in the world. The world has condemned Israeli behavior with almost 200 UN resolutions which Israel chooses to ignore, with US backing.

Why on earth is Israel, a rogue nuclear state allowed to lay waste to every international law and convention without criticism and their "enemies" - read Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Hamas - anyone who opposes Israel's failed, belligerent, apartheid aggressive policies - are not entitled to raise a hand in their own defense ?

Cut the billions of dollars we give them each year, we need the money here at home, not financing another war for the 'security' of our biggest welfare client.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Mark, Port Richey, FL — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:24:44 GMT

When "Bambi" Obama was elected we as a nation pretty much guaranteed that Iran would be allowed to have a nuclear weapon within the next four years. He lacks the experience, courage, and moral authority to lead this nation on the difficult course that must be taken to defeat Islamic fascists.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Leroy Barrineau Baltimore Maryland — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:34:29 GMT

I would really like for our president elect to read theses letters is that possible?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Joseph Johansson, Lawrence, Kansas — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:40:26 GMT

The problem is we can't trust religious fundamentalist with nuclear weapons. They have a warped sense of death and the path to martyrdom is to kill Americans. Americans couldn't care less about Iran or Islam. But we have to watchout for those that wish us harm. I try to remain objective, but its becoming more difficult every year. The path to peace is education and when education is preached and not presented openly, there is no chance for understanding between Western civilization and the Middle East. First thing we (America) needs to do, is kick out all the Middle Eastern students from our Universities. It seems were just training them on our soil so they can learn to do us harm.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Achmed bin Cous-Cous ibn Falafel — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:39:59 GMT

With all the money the Arab nations donate to the Clinton Foundation, you can be assured the USA will be taking a very different course indeed towards Iran and Islamic Extremeists.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Albert, Davao City, Philippines — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:45:34 GMT

Thanks to U.S and Israel! for fighting terrorism! we are all want peace and that peace stop thru stopping it. Remember, all tha sanctions was given to the Iran to stop thier nuclear activities but still they doing it. How we met peace if this Iran activity pursuing? If we tolerated the Iran goals for nuclear program, someday, we are all waking up no homes. Not all Iranians are bad, but thier leaders who made them bad images outside Iran. I have mercy on the innocent people who is the victims of these foolish leaders, these foolished and uncivilized hearts leaders who taught thier bad motives to pass it to the next generation. Thanks to U.S. and Israel for their truly want Peace!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

S.B. Stein E.B. NJ — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:48:35 GMT

Honestly, if Iran wants to show that their nuclear program isn't for weapons productions, then they need to totally open up to outside inspectors. South Africa did that, and it took at least two years. Iran can't be trusted until it shows some increased level of openness. When they stop funding terrorist groups, then I am more likely to trust them. They hate Israel for no other reason than Jews shouldn't be in charge.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

America First — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:10:03 GMT

So what if Iran posses a nuclear weapon.... Israel has it... Isreal has never used it, but it is conducting a genocide in palestine as I write this... we can no longer afford paying for AIPAC and Israeli criminal conducts..

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Willy — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:56:11 GMT

Guys!!!! this is how is going to be !!! israel attack Iran, Rusia comes in !!! big mess.... and all this with the UNited Nations against Israel!!! and guess what ? United States is going to help Israel !!!!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Lloyd — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 04:05:38 GMT

We are not slaves of Israel at all. I dont know where you people think Isreal controls the fate of the US. We have tried several different times to speak with Iran. We at one point even had an embassy there and look how that went. Iran does not want peace with the US if they did they would not be supporting all the terrorist that continue to attack every country in the world that doesnt agree with their ways. Including Isreal

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Derick, Berlin, Germany — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 04:45:38 GMT

I am sorry to say to all of you who don't understand the the Middle East, let alone Iran, this chess game iran and the west started 8 years ago. From the 2nd move on the west(US) is in a check mate situation. Iran has been playing a three dementional chess while US has been trying to learn a one dimentional chess by trail and error. The West's chess wiz Bush, lost the game long time ago. It is over! West has to deal with Iran on her terms. West can keep fantacizing about attacks, distruction, bunker busters etc. but it is trapped, any way you look at it, will lose. West will win the battle but will lose the big war! The sound of the first bomb hitting the Iranian terratory will begin the count down the Fall of 4th Riech. Iraq will fall into the arms of Iran immediatelt. Egypt,Lebanon, Afgan and Pakistan goverments will fall to the hands of fundamentalists. Jordan, Saudi Arabia,Bahrain, Kwiet, Qatar, Oman,Sudan,... and India will not be the same. If you don't do anything Iran wins, if you do something , Iran will win faster and rise higher. You can thank Mr. Bush and his New Con buddies for their Briliance!!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Republican Pariah — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 05:08:25 GMT

I heartily disagree with the opinion expressed above that the US should not be the moral police of the world. I suppose this person would have thought the same in WWII when Hitler's Third Reich were ravaging Europe and condemning millions to death camps? However, I do not hold the offenses committed by the Iranian theocratic government in the same regard as those committed by the Nazis. Iran should be allowed to pursue nuclear development as a means to replace oil as its primary energy source once its oil reserves are depleted. What's wrong with being forward thinking, I ask you? Perhaps Iran should also have nuclear weapons capabilities. India has nukes. Israel has lots of nuclear weapons (though they, of course, deny this. But you should ask why Mordecai Vanunu is being held captive in Jerusalem if you want to know the truth). Pakistan has nukes, too, and isn't that where Bin Laden is supposed to be hiding out? And isn't the Pakistani government about as stable as a jello mold these days? Why do we care if Iran has nukes? Are they going to use them against Israel and assure their own annihilation? you know, If I had a lot of oil and I had two enormous population centers with an ever-growing energy hunger (India and China) practically on my back door, I think I would want to have nukes. Yep, nukes...and a lot of 'em!

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Sadden American (and not muslim) — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 05:24:55 GMT

What I don't understand is why oblama want's to have diplomatic relations with Iran. They'er (Iran) are sending terrorist to Iraq to kill our soldiers and we're OK with that?? I'm telling you now, oblama is an agent to Iran and his other Muslim brothers and sister. Just watch what happens to the United Muslim States of American once oblama takes power.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Dan, Peoria, IL — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 05:58:16 GMT

The United States has done nothing but talk to Iran. It is obvious that Iran will continue to strive for a nuclear bomb to threated the United States and Israel. I really don't understand why we do not go after them now, as soon it will be too late. This is just another example of our politicians ignoring what is best for their own citizens, and trying to please the rest of the world.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

India — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 06:03:46 GMT

what is terrorist people shut your mouth... see what israel doing in palestine is it not terrorist .... if you wnt to fight against teroorist kil the terriorst people else dont kill children and women wahr they did ... everthing will end in one day thats death every soul born in this eatrh has to taste death dont forget that ok.... there in one more life in heaven believe that too... stop say terror ... first ask to shut the isreal then talk

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

ibsteve2u, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 06:17:04 GMT

As Russia and the Ukraine are even today demonstrating to Western Europe through each nation's manipulation of their respective roles in the production and redistribution of the natural gas, energy dependence provides a nation with the energy or a means of controlling the distribution of that energy both a carrot and a mighty big stick.

Sad, to think that the policies of this Administration have elevated Iran into a regional superpower and - if nothing is done to relieve the world of its oil addiction - put them on the brink of becoming a global superpower.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

john bose — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:24:04 GMT

Iran is the country we can not trust their leaders, they are all two faces, America should not fell in the trap of Iran leaders iran is very fanatic country looks their islamic law one of them is if you convert to Christainity from islam penality is death and on the other hand iran leaders are wishing merry Christmas to christains think about two faces policy

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

john bose — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:24:05 GMT

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

tallnyc9 — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:26:12 GMT

We decided that Iran is a terrorist state to please Israel, which exists only base in the protection of the United States. Everybody forgets that Iran never invade any country ever. Can we say the same of the United States and Israel? Actually we estimulated our good friend Sadam Hussein to attack Iran. I guess the hypcrites don't know or don't remember. If Israel suports Hezbolah, Hamas etc. So What? How many Groups of criminal the United States supported before? Remember the Death Squads in Central and Sout America. How about in Angola and South Africa? They were all criminal that we helped to overthrow their governments. Of course Iran is evil we are saint. By the why Iran cannot have nuclear weapons is Israel has already 100 waterheads? I see Israelis are better than Iranian? Israel is a loving peace country. I wonder when we will be independent form Israel. Hypocrites

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

axistogrind — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:56:21 GMT

Frankly, despite their bluster, their ability to counterattack US bases is impotent and strategically ineffectual even if successful. Every strike they sneak into a base means 20 precision weapons dropped on facilities and Republican Guard bases in Iran. What is troubling is their ability and willingness to launch terror suicide attacks around the globe, including here. A number of surgical strikes on Iran's infrastructure, including power plants and dams would bring it to its knees quickly. There is no such thing as a "you broke it you buy it policy" for Iran if it goes that far. They will have to come back from the stone age themselves. I wouldn't doubt our oil companies would love to see it, so oil profits would rise as Iran's output was crippled. Depending on how much they run our country, that could very well be part of the equation.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

The Thinker — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:59:29 GMT

It is Zionists propagandas. US Capital is now also Zionist occupied. Saddam had said he had no weapons and Zionists with forefront from US attacked and resulted in great monetary and other heavy losses. Now Iran is not swallowing Zionism, Zionists want him to force their acceptance dow their throat through "sugar-coated terrorism."

How many Zionists gave life in US Army? How many American Zionists are in the rogue "terrorist state?"

Wake up America!!!!! Zionists are using you while it is hiding behind the forefront for their own interests. They will suck you dry soon and might as well attack you one day.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Matthew, Montreal, Canada — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:06:31 GMT

I guess it would have been better if Halliburton, run by Dick Cheney at the time, hadn't sold Iran all those centrifuges. But that's just my opinion. projectcensored dot org is a great scholarly news source for such information.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

DJ — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:28:32 GMT

As i sit less then 20 miles from Iran. I just want to state, anyone that thinks you can discuss anything with a JIHAD supporter/jihadist has never looked one in the eyes.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

PG, Ontario, Canada — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:22:47 GMT

If Iran gets nuclear weapons, they'll probably get a peace movement the next day. After WWII, whenever nuclear weapons were introduced into a long term conflict, the result was stability.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Don Anderson, Kingston Ontario — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:45:32 GMT

Iran holds the same astonishing weapon on us as Hamas currently holds on Israel. Their weapon is our morality. They attack and then hide among women and children. Golda Meir said something like - I could find it within myself to forgive an enemy for killing our children but never one who forces me to kill theirs. How do you think Nazi Germany would have dealt with Iran in this situation. How did the USSR deal with Hungary in '57 or Rome deal with Israel in 70 AD? History would forgive us if we brought our entire arsenal to bear on the situation and wiped out the whole mountain area of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Give Iran a 24 hour ultimatum to change government and pack up their nuke program or perish. Since this very well may be what eventually happens anyway, so why not do it now and save millions of lives?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

cabdriver — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:45:51 GMT

The fact is, we still can't trust them, nor do they trust us. If they want to be hard-headed, they can find out the truth, Nuke power is beyond dangerous, for too many years to be a reliable source yet. They don't have to "trust us", they can ask their buddies Putin, or the French. Both have been giving them aid & business for years. Isn't it interesting, we haven't done anything to them for 30 years & they still claim some kind of "American empire building", Washington cant build a consensus on how to rebuild New Orleans! let alone an empire. Isn't it amazing how not using their oil is hurting every country equally? Between what the greedy folks on Wall Street & OPEC have done to the world economy, yet the world is still looking to blame every local problem on the US. How some folks can buy into this crap is beyond my understanding. I'm for an American First withdrawl from being the worlds "policeman", we've got more than enough problems of our own to focus on.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

optimistic — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:50:13 GMT

military action was tried in the early eighties and the iranians shot down enough of our copters and planes in a couple of days, and we bailed to stop the loses, it appears the iranians top officials will not accept any option shy of war, they will continue to produce at faster rates than our reactors and with enough time they will have bigger and better weapons than us then they will all the sudden want to discuss relations when they have a fist full of courage behind them, without the khemenei our this admadinejerk we could have relations considering the majority of the population of iran are against there policies, 3-ways, linger and do nothing while they supply, try to force diplomacy and potentially cause another war, or start assasinating from the top down we train our service members, maybe we should use some of thier training(we also have foreign service members, a foreigner would not put the face of america on the slayings only draw speculation and confusion amongst the arab world, sure they would point a finger at us but could they prove it was us or an internal affair). its called strategy something our war time leaders have forgotten

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Ben Davoodi — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:16:41 GMT

It is time to stop borrowing and using the illegal phrase “All Options on the Table”, which only means military action and was coined the Bush Neocons and the murderous Israeli Regime. I support and wish president Obama well and hope that he will succeed, but doubt that Mrs. Clinton can be an honest broker with Iran as she is heavily influenced by the Israel lobby and her husband’s foundation has received millions in donations from the most corrupt and anti human government on the face of planet; Saudi Arabia. These two entities are not in favor of positive relations between the United States and Iran.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Andrew Herbst, Calgary,Canada — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:30:35 GMT

With Obama as President we will have an opportunity to take a fresh look at the differences and issues that come between the US and other countries. What are the root causes? What would the world look like if we rid ourselves of these root causes? We are not talking about the existence of people but the behavior of people to one another. This behavior can be changed with better understanding, tolerance, and rule of law.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

John T, New York City, NY — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:51:46 GMT

Engagement sounds fine but no one believes it works quickly; what does the President-elect and Secretary-to-be Hillary propose to do IF, while the process of engagement is playing out, the Iranians announce that they have, in fact, developed a nuclear weapon? Call off the engagement and call for sanctions that France, Germany and Russia won't support or enforce?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Darryl Milwaukee, WI — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:00:24 GMT

First off, diplomacy with Mookie will NOT work! He's a nut case...it hasn't worked yet and it never will...he wants to wipe Israel off the map! We can't allow them to even get close to this if indeed they are trying to...screw the UN...useless...moon is as useless as the rest of them...sanctions? Give me a break...Mookie doesn't care, he gets his steak dinners and could care less about the common folk there...we could have taken him out dozens of times over if the gutless liberal contries would let us. Yed they should be able to persue nuclear ENERGY but with oversight! Can't trust them...Let Israel take them out

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Sara, Teh, Iran — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:05:12 GMT

The only way America can deal with Iran is diplomacy. For those who think that a military option is the right choice, look at what has happened in Afghanistan & Iraq- and those are countries that were war-torn/ruled by a dictator, not exactly a fair match. Many Iranians do not agree with the present government, but would never allow a foreign nation to take over.
Also interesting is the fact that those who are most eager for a military attack against Iran are those who call the country "barbaric" and "uncivilized"- then what does that make you?

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Shaun, UK — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:23:03 GMT

President Obama would need to see what happens after the Election in June and whether President Ahmadinajad is still in power. A combination of sanctions, and a change in Regime might lead Iran to constructively engage. The prevention of the proliferation of Nuclear weapons in the Middle East and engagement with it will all be needed. Military confrontation really can only be used as a last resort. Iran after all is responsible funding HAMAS, Hezebollah, and Islamic Jihad and supplying weapons in Iraq to fight Coalition forces.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Paul, Toledo, Ohio — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:25:17 GMT

All anyone in the civilized, rational world needs to do is read the posting by the clown from Tehran. Thats what they eat, sleep, and breath - anti-American, anti-Jewish nonsense. Brainwashed sheep. A country of nobody's who illogically strive to be somebody's. All the radical rhetoric in the world doesn't hide the fact that Iran makes an awfully soft "superpower". In that region, that's like being the least inept loser on the block. Some accomplishment! Calm down lil Iranians, cause a war with us here in the 'States is not what you really want. We won't play with you, we'll melt your souls. Like shooting fish in a barrel. America may have its abundant flaws, but at least we're not Iran.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash. — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:36:27 GMT

Those who oversimplified this matter with US is almighty and should just 'bomb' Iran out of the map should just wake up or stfu. If it can be done, it has been done. Instead, talk of diplomacy (albeit limited) is being done.

This is complex issue. So spare your brain from thinking about it. And while doing that, give us a break by not reproducing and discomfort future generation with your genetic material.

That is my opinion. Feel free to agree or disagree with me ;).

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Dave, SEMO — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:18:27 GMT

The problem with Iran, is the same problem that was had with Hitler in the early days. They are only buying time to get get strong enough to take what they want, and the stronger they get the more they want.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Ted, Naples FL — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:28:13 GMT

One of the biggest problems I see here is the lack of historical context, many of you people seem to not understand the facts. Iran: Once the great persian empire, decimated and finally reduced to the current borders after centuries, carved by WWI era imperialists. The USA (CIA) reinstalled the shah after democratic elctions brought in a ruling party not completely friendly to US interests(see hamas... oi vey). The people of iran suffered under the shah, and we became the great satan, because we exploited their people to the point of allowing religious fundamentalists to radicalize a generation and then manage to hold onto power for 40(+/-) years post revolution. We totally screwed them back then and they are still pissed about it, they booted us out of our embassy there. They were infact in the wrong with the hostages, and the manner of how they dealt with the situation, but the had been totally screwed by the CIA for 50 years and had some pent up aggression. If we had let them run their country back then, we never would have had the problems we have now or in the 70's.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

Jerry, Honolulu, HI — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:43:43 GMT

Thanks to Mr Bush, he and his cohorts alienated that part of the world by wanting to be a war president. Had he given more time to the UN Inspectors we won't have this problems that we don't know how to solve. We fight with modern weapons but powerless to contain the insurgents where it's getting out of hand. We should have fought in Iraq and Aftghanistan on their own terms, fight like the insurgents. I suspect this will be the end result if we are to win over there.

Iran is no threat at all, they hate the Israels after they were installed in the Middle East by the British. They are defiant but will not be able to sustain us if we get into a conflict with them. They know it too! that we can glazed them into eternity. What their hoping is other rogue country will come to their aid. I don't think dplomacy is the answer for Iran, they need head shrinkers.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

AB - Robbinsville, NJ — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:49:46 GMT

Betz - obviously you were not listenening when Ahmadenajad stated that Israel does not have a right to exist and must be wiped off the face of the earth. By the way that staement was echoed by his buddy Chavez in Venezuela.Wake up and get your head out of the sand. The world has been making statements like that against Israel for years followed up by such things suicide bombing and artillery shellings. Yet Israel has never made one single statement that any country DID NOT have the right to exist.

A ‘new’ U.S. approach to Iran?

dan hutton — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:29:37 GMT

I think that it is a great idea to open our embassy in Tehran again. We can give the Iranian Mulahs a second chance to hold our people for 444 days or longer. Ronald Reagan has died and our incoming president will listen to jimmy carter.