yes - there is a lot of rhetoric between Iran and the US. The simple fact of the matter is that Iran has done nothing to warrant a war. They are not attacking us - you would think after the complete and utter disaster Iraq turned out to be ( no WMDs, no links to 9/11, no being greeted as liberators,..) you would think you guys would have learned the lesson. Unfortunately it looks like it will take another ~5 thousand dead Americans and possibly more than 10 times that more dead people for you to learn. Pathetic

kdolt, time for you to be bitch-slapped again.

Iran has done nothing to warrant a war. Well I guess if you IGNORE the simple fact that they are supplying the terrorists in Iraq with weapons, instruction and cash, AND they have proclaimed that they want to wipe Isreal off the map, then they really haven't done anything. They are not a danger (Bush has said less and you libs think that he's a greater threat.)

Are you really that ignorant - YEP.
Are you really that SIMPLE MINDED - YOU BETCHA.

Have some more koolaid, loser.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad constantly reminds us that Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. In his warped vision of how things should be, "peaceful purposes" could easily include wiping Israel off the map using his nukes. In his view there would be peace with Israel gone. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad needs to be dealt with.

Something to keep in mind...

August 22 (Opinion Journal) By Bernard Lewis (8/8/06)

During the Cold War, both sides possessed weapons of mass destruction, but neither side used them, deterred by what was known as MAD, mutual assured destruction. Similar constraints have no doubt prevented their use in the confrontation between India and Pakistan. In our own day a new such confrontation seems to be looming between a nuclear-armed Iran and its favorite enemies, named by the late Ayatollah Khomeini as the Great Satan and the Little Satan, i.e., the United States and Israel. Against the U.S. the bombs might be delivered by terrorists, a method having the advantage of bearing no return address. Against Israel, the target is small enough to attempt obliteration by direct bombardment.[...]

There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers. This worldview and expectation, vividly expressed in speeches, articles and even schoolbooks, clearly shape the perception and therefore the policies of Ahmadinejad and his disciples. [...]

In Islam, as in Judaism and Christianity, there are certain beliefs concerning the cosmic struggle at the end of time—Gog and Magog, anti-Christ, Armageddon, and for Shiite Muslims, the long awaited return of the Hidden Imam, ending in the final victory of the forces of good over evil, however these may be defined. Mr. Ahmadinejad and his followers clearly believe that this time is now, and that the terminal struggle has already begun and is indeed well advanced. It may even have a date, indicated by several references by the Iranian president to giving his final answer to the U.S. about nuclear development by Aug. 22. This was at first reported as “by the end of August,” but Mr. Ahmadinejad’s statement was more precise.

What is the significance of Aug. 22? This year, Aug. 22 corresponds, in the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to “the farthest mosque,” usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind.

A passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an 11th-grade Iranian schoolbook, is revealing. “I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [i.e., the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against their whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another’s hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours.”

In this context, mutual assured destruction, the deterrent that worked so well during the Cold War, would have no meaning. At the end of time, there will be general destruction anyway. What will matter will be the final destination of the dead—hell for the infidels, and heaven for the believers. For people with this mindset, MAD is not a constraint; it is an inducement.

As has been pointed out on previous threads, Iran says their nuclear program is for peaceful purposes.

They are also peacefully developing intercontinental ballistic missles which, by the way, are useless without either chemical, biological or nuclear warheads.

Do the math.

If the argument of the left is that it will be too hard and too expensive then may I point out that our nuclear weapons are bought and paid for. The Trumann Dilemma.