Diplomacy is preferable to war, but there has to be a credible threat of some sort of retaliation for diplomacy to work. Economic sanctions are the best tool the international community has against a country like Iran, but our ability to pressure Iran with sanctions is limited by the refusal of Russia and China to cooperate with more robust sanctions against them.
Fortunately, we have other credible means of threatening Iran. To paraphrase Teddy Rosevelt, Bush is speaking softly and carrying the big stick of the U.S. military on his shoulder, and the Iranians believe (quite reasonably) that Bush will take that stick and thump them if need be. Bush's tough talk on Iran is part of the diplomatic strategy, not an attempt to subvert diplomacy. On Dec 6, 2007 3:13 AM, Vivec wrote: > > Government report released Tuesday says Iran stopped nuke work in 2003" > > http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/05/bush.iran/index.html > > At least this information came out before they dropped a tactical nuke. > It's amazing the misdirection and the build up over Iran. > > Let's hope that diplomacy is continued with Iran to bring them in-line > with what the world wants. > Because I don't think anyone wants a Nuclear Strike capable Iran. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade to ColdFusion 8 and integrate with Adobe Flex http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJP Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:247927 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
