Q&A Friday #41: Should We Go Into Talks With Iran?
Question:“Do you think Dr. Rice will be able to make any progress with Iran and the nuclear situation or will she merely be giving them more prestige by chatting with them? Is there any chance at all of Europe taking this matter seriously?” — Anna_Venger
Answer: When you’re talking about a rogue nation like Iran, that’s run by America-hating Islamo-Fascists, dialogue, in and of itself, is pointless. You may be able to solve problems with nations like Canada, Germany, or New Zealand, but not with a country like Iran on an issue like nuclear weapons.
In this case, the psychopaths who run that country only care about one thing: Will the US or Israel put a gun up to our head — and if so, are they willing to pull the trigger?
So, short of a revolution, I don’t expect Iran to give up their quest for nuclear weapons unless they’re absolutely convinced that we’re going to do cataclysmic damage to them or unless they believe we’ll put an end to their regime if they refuse to do so.
So, does that mean there is no point to talking with Iran? Not necessarily. If, for some reason, they were to agree to verifiably cease nuclear enrichment, it might buy us more time to improve our intelligence in Iran. Also, the fact that we’re willing to go into talks with them could be used to get more allies on board for severe sanctions or it could help gin up support for a bombing run. Either of these things would be a plus. But, will we “talk it out” with Iran? It seems highly unlikely.
In my opinion, either there will be a revolution, the Iranians will be bombed by us or the Israelis, or they’ll end up with nukes. Out of those three options, a revolution would, of course, be the number one choice. But, if that’s not in the cards, it would be much wiser to bomb them than to let them get nukes.