Do you realize you just said a nuclear arms race in the ME would be a good thing?
You also demonstrated great naivete toward the culture of martyrdom. Haven't you seen what Palestinian children are taught? Who they name town squares after? The genocided Palestinians would all be shaheeds blown straight to paradise in the great Islamic victory over the pigs and monkeys. With respect Fletcher, you really don't get this region and the irrational thinking of people who value death over life. See Below:
[FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Former Pentagon Analyst: Regime Change in Iran Is the Only Answer - Oren Kessler (Jerusalem Post)[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, sans-serif] Harold Rhode, who served for decades as an analyst of the Islamic world's culture and politics in the office of the U.S. secretary of defense, knows all of the Middle East's four major languages: Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Hebrew. A university student in Iran in 1978 on the eve of the Islamic Revolution that ousted the Shah the following year, Rhode has obvious affection for Iran's culture and people, but pulls no punches in denouncing the tyrants who now run its government.
"I believe regime change is the only answer," he said in an interview. Any successor regime would be preferable to the current theocracy. "One can't think of anything more extreme." Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, he continued, "hated the people who are now in power. He kept them away from government because he feared they would lead Iran to its destruction."
He said there was no reason to publicize the West's next move by talking about it unnecessarily. "You don't want to show your cards to the Iranians; you want to use your cards to win."
According to Rhode, Iran's current leaders "believe that if they provoke a conflagration, their hidden imam, the mahdi, will return to save them. So Mutually Assured Destruction - MAD - that we used effectively with the Soviets is an incentive and an inducement, not a deterrent."
"There's unfortunately no such thing as a win-win situation in the Middle East. Confidence-building measures are interpreted as weakness. You talk after you've won; if you do so beforehand, it is seen as weakness." "In the languages of the Middle East, the concept for compromise doesn't exist - at least not as we understand it....Instead, one who compromises is said to have brought 'aib, or shame, on himself. That's why the Middle East is always in a state of tension," he explained.
[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, sans-serif] See also The Sources of Iranian Negotiating Behavior - Harold Rhode (Institute for Contemporary Affairs-Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs)
See also Ex-CIA Spy in Iran: History of Failed Negotiations Shows Iran Won't Deal - Reza Khalili (Christian Science Monitor) [/FONT]
The way i understand it is simple. The ME is a shithole. Any person that want to raise a family and have a life free from worry should move from there. Israel is never going to stop having enemies so stopping Iran from having a nuke will do nothing. I say let them all have a finger on a button. Let them play chicken. Your cite is correct. There is no win win situation in the ME. So lets do something we have never done before and see if it works... lets pick up our ball and go home. Let them have nukes and agree to not use them, those that dont participate will be looked upon as such that that do and violate will bring the whole region down on them. Lets exercise a little Darwinism over there. The rest of the world has figured it out, seems as though the ME and many parts of Africa refuse to become civilized. Put their fate into their own hands. Lets keep our hands clean.