I ran, she ran, we all screamed for Iran.
Who wants a little lesson in international political science?
Well too bad! You're gonna get one now!! To many people I've been speaking with don't fully understand the ramifications of what's going on in Iran right now, and even less have an opinion on what we should do about it other than chanting "Parking Lot, Parking Lot!" (you know who you are!)
So I'm going to babble for a bit about it.
Iran recently elected a new president who is a little bit right of center. He's not making a lot of friends with the rest of the world, but he's extremely popular at home, and in Palestine. Iran is also marching steadily towards enriching its own uranium for purely domestic use that could never in a million years be used to create nuclear weapons.
Ummm, ok, here's the problem with that. Enriching your own uranium for only your own consumption produces a big pile of enriched uranium. You'd need at least about 30 reactors to even start to need to produce your own. Iran has . .. . . three.
My old professor used to explain it this way. Let's say you drink about 2 gallons of milk a week at your home. You probably don't need to homogenize your own supply just yet. But if you own say. . . your own hotel and restaurant chain, it might make a little more sense.
So, if Iran couldn't possibly use that much enriched uranium, perhaps they intend on selling the excess on the world market right? Ummmm, there's a problem with that too. There aren't THAT many countries in the world that have reactors that don't already have all of the uranium they need, and those that WANT more enriched uranium but don't have reactors will tend to use them in . . . well, now we're right back to that other use again.
So, what the heck are we supposed to do about it? Here is where things get scary, because on our current course, we only have 2 options. Military and dialog. The problem is that this one of those rare cases when the 2 options ARE mutually exclusive. Let me explain.
Hardliners in Iran refuse to stop enriching their own uranium because they want to make their own weapons for 'homeland defense'. And they are able to successfully argue that their sovereignty is threatened by western interests who refuse to rule out military options.
Western interests feel refuse to dialog without ruling out military options because they are convinced that overwhelming force is the only language some countries understand.
This path will lead to an inevitable ultimatum and conflict that we've seen repeat itself many times in history, the only exception being the Cold War. And THAT exception was reached through a long process of dialog AFTER the two sides realized that with the military solution, everyone loses, so they ruled it out.
Some argue that if we move militarily now, we can keep Iran from getting to the weapons grade enrichment. The problem is that we can't. We could DELAY it for 5-7 years at most, but nuclear proliferation is a complete and utter inevitability at this point. Pakistan, India, and Israel have all become nuclear powers recently, and North Korea is right on their heels as well.
Some others argue that it is high past the time America returns to a policy of isolationism and gets the heck out of the rest of the worlds affairs. To this I say, pshaw! Globalization is also inevitable, as is the internet (China is in for some surprises), and trade actually STOPS WARS. And if there's one thing that we need in the region around Iran right now, it is some stabilizing factor. This is a region that is critical to the world for a number of reasons.
I'm actually starting to feel sorry for our current President. He can't win no matter what he does on the domestic or foreign front right now. Admittedly he got himself into this position in the first place, but how difficult must it be to be that unpopular with both your political opponents and your own party? The backlash from Harriet Miers was an entertaining diversion (if you could set aside what is happening to the Supreme Court at the same time). The current list of presidential hot topics reads like list of these are a few of my least favorite things. Iraq, Iran, unauthorized leaks, authorized leaks, immigration reform, gas prices, healthcare reform, hurricane season, military generals in revolt . . . . and all time low poll numbers.
Some days you're the dog, and some days you're the fire-hydrant.
Well too bad! You're gonna get one now!! To many people I've been speaking with don't fully understand the ramifications of what's going on in Iran right now, and even less have an opinion on what we should do about it other than chanting "Parking Lot, Parking Lot!" (you know who you are!)
So I'm going to babble for a bit about it.
Iran recently elected a new president who is a little bit right of center. He's not making a lot of friends with the rest of the world, but he's extremely popular at home, and in Palestine. Iran is also marching steadily towards enriching its own uranium for purely domestic use that could never in a million years be used to create nuclear weapons.
Ummm, ok, here's the problem with that. Enriching your own uranium for only your own consumption produces a big pile of enriched uranium. You'd need at least about 30 reactors to even start to need to produce your own. Iran has . .. . . three.
My old professor used to explain it this way. Let's say you drink about 2 gallons of milk a week at your home. You probably don't need to homogenize your own supply just yet. But if you own say. . . your own hotel and restaurant chain, it might make a little more sense.
So, if Iran couldn't possibly use that much enriched uranium, perhaps they intend on selling the excess on the world market right? Ummmm, there's a problem with that too. There aren't THAT many countries in the world that have reactors that don't already have all of the uranium they need, and those that WANT more enriched uranium but don't have reactors will tend to use them in . . . well, now we're right back to that other use again.
So, what the heck are we supposed to do about it? Here is where things get scary, because on our current course, we only have 2 options. Military and dialog. The problem is that this one of those rare cases when the 2 options ARE mutually exclusive. Let me explain.
Hardliners in Iran refuse to stop enriching their own uranium because they want to make their own weapons for 'homeland defense'. And they are able to successfully argue that their sovereignty is threatened by western interests who refuse to rule out military options.
Western interests feel refuse to dialog without ruling out military options because they are convinced that overwhelming force is the only language some countries understand.
This path will lead to an inevitable ultimatum and conflict that we've seen repeat itself many times in history, the only exception being the Cold War. And THAT exception was reached through a long process of dialog AFTER the two sides realized that with the military solution, everyone loses, so they ruled it out.
Some argue that if we move militarily now, we can keep Iran from getting to the weapons grade enrichment. The problem is that we can't. We could DELAY it for 5-7 years at most, but nuclear proliferation is a complete and utter inevitability at this point. Pakistan, India, and Israel have all become nuclear powers recently, and North Korea is right on their heels as well.
Some others argue that it is high past the time America returns to a policy of isolationism and gets the heck out of the rest of the worlds affairs. To this I say, pshaw! Globalization is also inevitable, as is the internet (China is in for some surprises), and trade actually STOPS WARS. And if there's one thing that we need in the region around Iran right now, it is some stabilizing factor. This is a region that is critical to the world for a number of reasons.
- It is the religious center for most popular religion on the planet
- It contains 80% of the remaining oil reserves on the planet
- Until someone invents a teleportation device, the global economy is still reliant on oil
I'm actually starting to feel sorry for our current President. He can't win no matter what he does on the domestic or foreign front right now. Admittedly he got himself into this position in the first place, but how difficult must it be to be that unpopular with both your political opponents and your own party? The backlash from Harriet Miers was an entertaining diversion (if you could set aside what is happening to the Supreme Court at the same time). The current list of presidential hot topics reads like list of these are a few of my least favorite things. Iraq, Iran, unauthorized leaks, authorized leaks, immigration reform, gas prices, healthcare reform, hurricane season, military generals in revolt . . . . and all time low poll numbers.
Some days you're the dog, and some days you're the fire-hydrant.
Comments
The fact that they have a sect of rabbi who have been trained from birth in how to start up the temple rituals again, and have all of the furnishings ready decorate the interior ready to go, kinda concerns me.
But again, you're right, that hasn't happened yet. I think when it does, that will be one of the biggest signs of living in the end times.