Seems to me that Iran is vying for the leadership of the Muslim world and that Saudi Arabia is rather upset about that. I predict that if Iran does go nuclear, so will the Saudis, Egypt, Turkey and probably others. Given the high possibility that Islamist organizations such as the Muslem Brotherood in Egypt or conservative religious leaders in Saudi Arabia will seize power within the next ten years, the Middle Eastern tinderbox could trigger a nuclear holocaust.

I don't believe anyone is going to attack Iran; it would cause enormous turmoil in the Mideast and the rest of the world. But jawboning is a different tactic.

Omni

Hi raycofe. I appreciate your honest response to my message. However, I do want to point out that the quote you are referring to was mistranslated. Ahmadenijad (and Khoumeini before him) did not say that they want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Their remark was more along the lines that they consider it an aberration that will soon disappear of it's own accord (because it doesn't fit or belong).

More than that, Iran would never directly attack Israel (unless in self defense) because they know that the US would instantly retaliate in a devastating manner. If you watch Mosaic, it seems clear that things are going pretty well in Iran right now, the people are tired of war, they are getting some freedoms back and their resources have been growing. Most of their recent initiatives have been to place themselves in a good position for international trade.

If you read between the lines it seems clear that Iran wants sovereignty, respect and opportunities to show leadership in it's own part of the world, and to trade freely with the countries that are currently treating it with respect, that would be Russia and China. If this is 'terrorism', then I'm all for it. Like everyone else on the US 'bugaboo list', they would like us to go away and mind our own business, and they are doing quiet things to make that happen. It's hard to blame them for that.

As far as Iran hesitating or not hesitating to use Nuclear weapons. They know very well that if they did so, Israel has enough nukes to wipe them off the face of the earth instantly, as do the US, China, Russia, Pakistan and India. Worse than that, they know that some Israeli factions are, at the moment, shamelessly imploring the US to preemptively attack them, and still they have persisted in trying to keep a balance in the area. The fact is that there is really no way anyone can use nukes without inviting disaster. The only country that has not hesitated to use nukes in the past, and who is currently threatening another country with them is the US.

The US finds Iranian sovereignty and Iranian initiatives in the Middle East uncomfortable because we (our govt) want hegemony in the area and control of the resources. I don't believe this can happen under any circumstances any more. It is already too late. However, the Bush administration is hell-bent to make it so at any cost, and Congress is, at minimum, ambivalent on the subject. But, don't they have a right to live in peace in their own part of the world, and to support populist political movements in the neighboring countries? It's not just their oil, it's their neighborhood.

I think we need to become a good neighbor in the world, but I don't know how to make this happen. Mosaic is wonderful because people see other people in other places as they see themselves. More of this has to happen, and we need a government that is ready to participate in the world in a more respectful and egalitarian manner. I don't know how to make this happen, but I am going to continue to promote the idea as long as I have ways to do so.

Apologies for our recent problems with Mosaic video uploads. We will be re-posting replacement clips today and we don't expect this issue to come up again in the future. Thanks for your ongoing support of Mosaic and Link TV!

any idea why the stream fills up nicely but the audio is not there anymore? same with some other links as well. quicktime codec, all open source codecs, onece opened, it other things happen to my links as well. like some app is causing and interference. jam jame feed been the same for months now.

I allways enjoy reading jbello's comments, I agree with them sometimes and sometimes. I am not of the US, my home base is in the southern hemishpere. I am struck by the number of people concerned about the US attacking Iran when by far the most likely scene is that Iran will attack the US and the west through Israel. Iran has stated a number of times that Israel should be wiped from the map so in my opinion this is the greater concern. When Iran developes Nuclear weapons do we think they will hesitate to use them?

I think the last thing the Middle East needs is more weapons. It is a sad pass where the instruments of death and mayhem are the only gift we have to offer them. However, I am not sure Secretary Rice's comment is relevant. It might be orthogonal to the real issues. Consider that, according to some reliable sources, the US has been army radical Sunni factions behind the scenes to keep the Shia from any real preeminence. Meanwhile they are supporting a Shia government in Iraq. Everthing they say and do is contradictory and obscures the facts on the ground.

I think this weapons deal is related to the Bush Administration's stated desire to attack Iran. These countries are being fortified, and to some extent, seduced, to support us if we decided to initiate a conflict with Iran. Early this year, after a little prodding from Russia, the Saudis and the UAE made it clear that although they are not 'allied' with Iran, that they would not support an attack against their neighbor. Now they are being wooed to our side in this project. Even Israel does not really want to participate in such an attack. They just want us to do it for them. But I think Cheney and his buddys want to make sure that Israel does play her part.

There is still the problem that China and Russia will not agree to an attack on Iran, and even the EU is complaining about some of the sanctions. However, I think Cheney is banking on the other big powers being polite enough to stay out of such a confrontation, and only addressing concerns about local players who are likely to cause problems on the ground if they oppose our actions, and whom they have a real investment in controlling.

In my opinion, this might be a serious misjudgement since Russia and China both have in progress oil and gas deals with Iran. There just may be a limit to their tolerance for US interference in their ongoing economic planning. I am sure that they feel that they have just as much right to economic sovereignty as we do. I don't think the Bush administration has any kind of realistic perception of the other powerful nations in the world who have been consistently deferring to them over the last few years. They just kind of take them for granted while they spend all their resources in the 'sandbox'. It could be a very bad thing if some other influence were to become preeminant in the area after we make sure that all players are armed to the teeth.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that Iran was the cause of instability in the Middle East as she announced more than $ 20 billion package of aid to US allies in the region.
America's offering, which includes military aid to Israel and Egypt alongside sales to Saudi Arabia and some Gulf states, has already stirred criticism across the Middle East since it was announced on Sunday.
"The United States is determined to assure our allies that we are going to be reliable in helping them to meet their security needs," Miss Rice said.

Secretary Rice denied the weapons were being given simply in exchange for backing to America's ongoing occupation of Iraq.
Do you agree with her statement?
Does the Middle East need more weapons?