I'm not so concerned about the issue, seeing as how this quote seems to show that Iran doesn't have hostile intentions:
Quote:
On Wednesday, Iran's nuclear chief, Gholamreza Aghazadeh, said the United States had no option but to recognize Iran as a nuclear power. But he said Iran was prepared to give the West a share in its enrichment facilities to ease fears that it may seek to make weapons.
"The best way to get out of this issue is for countries that have concern become our partners in Natanz in management, production and technology. This is a very important confidence-building measure," he told state-run television.
|
Bush would be seriously fucked if he nukes them without being nuked in the first place...even though the nukes would undoubtedly be intercepted. The chances of Iran hitting Israel --- which has the best intelligence in the world, basically --- are slim, and there are many factors that could contribute to not hitting the places they could actually strike.
Isolationism may be one of the ideal choices in this matter...letting the problem resolve itself, unless intervention is necessary. As long as America is not hit, is there a reason to be involved? I don't know, I'm not much for reading the minds of politicians, but I know I'm not troubled by the news.