Israel plays its role and Iran plays us

ARTICLE: Clinton Lays Out Iran Requirements, By MARK LANDLER, New York Times, September 15, 2009

I think the show-of-force requirement on our side here will be overwhelming, allowing the Iranians to act suitably enraged. That's why I think Medvedev did his recent hint on Moscow's openness on sanctions: Moscow has little sense these talks will go anywhere, so why not float it?

To me, this is a lot of time-buying, but little else. I don't think our hearts are in it and for good reasons: Israel plays its role to perfection, allowing Tehran to play us for time.

I see nothing here that tells me we're still not inevitably heading to Iran having nukes.

(Via WPR Media Roundup)

Comments

[Guest469]

Why does Iran want nukes? They would never dare use them. If anything nukes will make them more vulnerable not less. Miscalculations would be a lot more lethal.Main upside I suppose would be that it's politically popular.

[Patrick O'Connor]

Countries with nukes don't get invaded by other countries

[Javaid Akhtar]

They don't need nukes..they need deterrence.Which they'll get with capability.Deterrence did'nt work for Saddam with his collection of 'WMD'.....strangely.

[Tom Barnett]

Frankly, Javaid, that was because we knew he had no nukes yet (the claim was that he was working toward them), and we weren't particularly afraid of his chem or bio--at least not enough not to go.

But here's the kicker: we told him we'd answer with worse if he used any WMD, and he believed us for good reason.