{"id":8757,"date":"2010-12-09T12:49:20","date_gmt":"2010-12-09T20:49:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=8757"},"modified":"2010-12-10T16:31:02","modified_gmt":"2010-12-11T00:31:02","slug":"thursday-iran-talking-points-17","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2010\/12\/09\/thursday-iran-talking-points-17\/","title":{"rendered":"Thursday Iran Talking Points"},"content":{"rendered":"

from LobeLog<\/a>: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for December 9th, 2010:<\/em><\/p>\n

The Washington Post<\/a><\/em>: The Post<\/em>\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s editorial board opines that the P5+1 talks in Geneva benefited Iran by introducing Turkey into the negotiations, where negotiations will continue next month, and provided Tehran with a means to postpone further additional international pressure. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153[Iran] seeks to delay further sanctions, create dissension among the United States and its allies, and distract attention from its continuing crackdown on the opposition Green movement,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d writes the Post. The editorial board concludes that the United States should continue to participate in negotiations, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153but it does mean that they should press forward simultaneously with other strategies to stop the Iranian nuclear program.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Such \u00e2\u20ac\u0153strategies,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d include \u00e2\u20ac\u0153a full ban on landings by Iranian airliners in Europe,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d and \u00e2\u20ac\u0153great efforts to support Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s internal resistance.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

The Washington Post<\/a><\/em>: Jennifer Rubin writes on her Right Turn blog that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153we really have no effective policy to thwart an Iranian nuclear program.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Rubin interviews the American Enterprise Institute<\/a>\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s Danielle Pletka<\/a> who tells her that, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Every negotiation [with the Iranians] is like Groundhog Day, but at the end of the process, instead of spring, Iran gets a nuclear weapon.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d Rubin cites Sen. Joe Lieberman\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s speech<\/a> at the Council on Foreign Relations earlier this year and his call for putting a military strike on the table. She concludes, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Having taken the use of force effectively off the table, can the administration credibly put it back on, and if not, are we resigned to a nuclear-armed revolutionary Islamic state?\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

Commentary<\/a><\/em>: Omri Creen blogs on Contentions that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Egypt \u00e2\u20ac\u201d perennially a bullet and a disgruntled general away from being the most dangerous country in the region \u00e2\u20ac\u201d is not going to cope well<\/a> with Iranian nuclearization,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d citing a WikiLeaks cable which describes Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak telling U.S. officials that Egypt may seek nuclear arms if Iran develops a nuclear weapon. Creen warns that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s little doubt that Cairo would take to bullying neighbors over how the Nile is divvied up<\/a>, for instance,\u00e2\u20ac\u009d and \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Muslim radicals will run roughshod over religious minorities, correctly guessing that no one will pressure the fragile Egyptian regime to stop them.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n

National Review Online<\/a><\/em>: Clifford May, president of the hawkish Foundation for Defense of Democracies<\/a>, writes critically of the Obama administration\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s response to the WikiLeaks cable scandal and questions the U.S.\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s preparedness for cyber attacks. May argues that \u00e2\u20ac\u0153[Iranian President] Mahmoud Ahmadinejad might view such a cyberattack as contributing toward his long-term goal: \u00e2\u20ac\u0153A world without America.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d He suggests, recycling the meme<\/a> that Iranian leadership is irrational<\/a>, that Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s leaders might not care if the U.S. retaliated with \u00e2\u20ac\u0153a rain of fire.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d May cites the Stuxnet computer worm, which reportedly attacked Iran\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s nuclear facilities, as an example of effective use of cyber warfare against Iran. He concludes, \u00e2\u20ac\u0153Deductive speculation has led many to the belief that the Israelis developed this sophisticated search-and-destroy device. Did Americans partner with them? I hope so.\u00e2\u20ac\u009d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for December 9th, 2010: The Washington Post: The Post\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s editorial board opines that the P5+1 talks in Geneva benefited Iran by introducing Turkey into the negotiations, where negotiations will continue next month, and provided Tehran with a means to postpone further additional international pressure. \u00e2\u20ac\u0153[Iran] seeks […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":71,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-8757","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8757","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/71"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8757"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8757\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8774,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8757\/revisions\/8774"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8757"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8757"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8757"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=8757"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}