Let's pray that Obama actually supports the Iranian dissidents this time.

Let's pray that Obama actually supports the Iranian dissidents this time.

Nobody actually knows if that would help. Open U.S. support just makes it easier for the regime to label the rebels as traitors.

Obama will not go against his mullah's directions.

Apparently rumour has it there has been a large explosion at Fordo trapping 240 people underground.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/sabotage-key-iranian-nuclear-facility-hit/

Apparently rumour has it there has been a large explosion at Fordo trapping 240 people underground.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/sabotage-key-iranian-nuclear-facility-hit/

Or maybe not.....

http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2013/01/30/irans-fordow-nuclear-site-explosion/

Apparently rumour has it there has been a large explosion at Fordo trapping 240 people underground.

http://www.wnd.com/2...r-facility-hit/

Or maybe not.....

http://thediplomat.c...site-explosion/

Whatever, it seems like the Iranians are good fabricators, considering their recent claim to have sent a monkey into space.

Apparently rumour has it there has been a large explosion at Fordo trapping 240 people underground.

http://www.wnd.com/2...r-facility-hit/

Or maybe not.....

http://thediplomat.c...site-explosion/

Whatever, it seems like the Iranians are good fabricators, considering their recent claim to have sent a monkey into space.

Here is the latest news on Iranian's race for the stars. You can follow the progression quite easily. They sent up a woman in 2006, a mouse, turtle and some worms in 2010 and a monkey in 2013. Nobody can claim the Iranians don't have women's rights on their agenda.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ahmadinejad wants to be Iran's first astronaut

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI | Associated Press – 1 hr 46 mins ago

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday that he's ready to take the risk of being the first Iranian astronaut sent into space as part of Iran's goal of a manned space flight.

...From the article...

Space tourist Anousheh Ansari was the first Iranian to make a journey into space aboard a Soyuz TMA-9 capsule from Baikonur, Kazakhastan, in September 2006. The 40-year-old telecommunications entrepreneur paid a reported $20 million for a space station visit. Her journey became an inspiration to women in male-dominated Iran.

Iran sent a monkey into space last Monday, describing the launch a successful step toward Tehran's plan to send an astronaut into space within the next five to six years. The monkey named "Pishgam," which means pioneer in Farsi, reportedly traveled 120 kilometers (72 miles) and safely returned to Earth.

In 2010, Iran said it launched an Explorer rocket into space carrying a mouse, a turtle and worms.

http://news.yahoo.com/ahmadinejad-wants-irans-first-astronaut-115509770.html

You can bet lots of people would be prepared to throw in a few Rials if it was a one way ticket.

Iran has again strongly defended its controversial nuclear programme ahead of a new round of talks with world powers in Kazakhstan.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22029888

Iran insists its purposes are purely civilian, asserting it needs enriched uranium to make medical isotopes.

Yet by its own admission it has (or had many months ago) enough to supply the entire world for a hundred years.

The medical isotopes needed have a short half life so putting them in storage is not an option, therefore what is the world to think?

.

.

Congratulations!!

At last a post that says nothing controversial.

.

Congratulations!!

At last a post that says nothing controversial.

I "liked" it.

Now I'm really worried.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9985757/Iranian-scientist-claims-to-have-invented-time-machine.html

Now I'm really worried.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9985757/Iranian-scientist-claims-to-have-invented-time-machine.html

lol

Seems like a fine piece of brinkmanship at the moment.

At least the Syrian crisis seems to have kick-started discussions which wouldn't even have got off the ground a couple of months ago. Talking is always going to be better than not talking, though whether it has any results remains to be seen.

For Rouhani, it's a chance to distance himself from his eccentric predecessor; for Obama it's yet another lifeline (how many does he need?).

This must be the reason Obama doesn't call the Republican leaders about the budget and debt problems.

It seems he wants to negotiate with the Iranians but not the Republicans. Strange man, indeed.

This must be the reason Obama doesn't call the Republican leaders about the budget and debt problems.

It seems he wants to negotiate with the Iranians but not the Republicans. Strange man, indeed.

There's probably a far better chance of actually getting a deal done with the Iranians......at least they put on the appearance of wishing to be constructive.

This must be the reason Obama doesn't call the Republican leaders about the budget and debt problems.

It seems he wants to negotiate with the Iranians but not the Republicans. Strange man, indeed.

There's probably a far better chance of actually getting a deal done with the Iranians......at least they put on the appearance of wishing to be constructive.

Deal? That reminds me of Chamberlain's well known piece of paper.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4217/iran_and_the_lessons_of_chamberlain_s_appeasement

This must be the reason Obama doesn't call the Republican leaders about the budget and debt problems.

It seems he wants to negotiate with the Iranians but not the Republicans. Strange man, indeed.

There's probably a far better chance of actually getting a deal done with the Iranians......at least they put on the appearance of wishing to be constructive.

Deal? That reminds me of Chamberlain's well known piece of paper.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4217/iran_and_the_lessons_of_chamberlain_s_appeasement

And the alternative would be....?

Sanctions are really hurting Iran, perhaps they really do want to do a deal. If they are just stalling they end up with a basket case of an economy plus a nuclear weapon. Would they really want to engage in a nuclear exchange with Israel?

With all your war-fighting experience perhaps you have a viable military option.....

Sanctions are really hurting Iran, perhaps they really do want to do a deal.

I agree. The sanctions are doing what they were intended to do.

Iran has a huge number of well educated young people who are not interested in Islam and offended if you call them Muslim. Israel is acting closely to the will of the electorate, Iran is not. Israel is peeing its pants because of Iran decides to be reasonable then the same could well be expected of them. Israel have been building and continue to build home in occupied territory which is against international law. They dispute that doing so is against international law but they are the only one's saying it. Iran, if it gets into the fold, is going to press the international community on this to get a judgement. It will no doubt be interesting.

This must be the reason Obama doesn't call the Republican leaders about the budget and debt problems.

It seems he wants to negotiate with the Iranians but not the Republicans. Strange man, indeed.

There's probably a far better chance of actually getting a deal done with the Iranians......at least they put on the appearance of wishing to be constructive.

Deal? That reminds me of Chamberlain's well known piece of paper.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4217/iran_and_the_lessons_of_chamberlain_s_appeasement

And the alternative would be....?

Sanctions are really hurting Iran, perhaps they really do want to do a deal. If they are just stalling they end up with a basket case of an economy plus a nuclear weapon. Would they really want to engage in a nuclear exchange with Israel?

With all your war-fighting experience perhaps you have a viable military option.....

Iran has nothing else in mind than dropping a nuclear device on Israel and then being bombed back to stone age. you don't believe me? ask Netanyahu!

This must be the reason Obama doesn't call the Republican leaders about the budget and debt problems.

It seems he wants to negotiate with the Iranians but not the Republicans. Strange man, indeed.

There's probably a far better chance of actually getting a deal done with the Iranians......at least they put on the appearance of wishing to be constructive.

Deal? That reminds me of Chamberlain's well known piece of paper.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4217/iran_and_the_lessons_of_chamberlain_s_appeasement

Or the Good Friday Agreement?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement

Iran has nothing else in mind than dropping a nuclear device on Israel and then being bombed back to stone age.

Because of their religious belief in the 12th Mahdi - brought forth by chaos -you may be right.

This must be the reason Obama doesn't call the Republican leaders about the budget and debt problems.

It seems he wants to negotiate with the Iranians but not the Republicans. Strange man, indeed.

There's probably a far better chance of actually getting a deal done with the Iranians......at least they put on the appearance of wishing to be constructive.

Deal? That reminds me of Chamberlain's well known piece of paper.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4217/iran_and_the_lessons_of_chamberlain_s_appeasement

Or the Good Friday Agreement?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement

With Iran it's more a case of fallout road than Falls road, you are comparing a spat over nationality with Iran's insane twelvers who actually believe something akin to Armageddon is a prerequisite for their destiny.

Here's something interesting, it would appear that Obama's decision to go down the appeasement road has made some strange bedfellows to oppose his policy.

http://www.debka.com/article/23323/Israel-and-Saudi-Arabia-are-coordinating-policies-to-counter-US-d%C3%A9tente-with-Iran-

Israel is peeing its pants because of Iran decides to be reasonable then the same could well be expected of them.

Horse manure. Iran signed a treaty that it would not build nuclear weapons. Israel did not.

Building on disputed territory is nowhere near the same league - especially since the countries that Israel took it away from, after being attacked, were occupying it by miltary force themselves.

Here's something interesting, it would appear that Obama's decision to go down the appeasement road has made some strange bedfellows to oppose his policy.

http://www.debka.com/article/23323/Israel-and-Saudi-Arabia-are-coordinating-policies-to-counter-US-détente-with-Iran-

An interesting paragraph from that. I am afraid that Obama might turn out to be our Neville Chamberlain.

President Obama knows that Israel’s military capacity is up to a solo operation against Iran. Tehran, however, though conscious of the IDF’s high military, technological and cyber warfare capabilities, is convinced that Israel like the United States has lost the appetite for a military initiative.

With Iran it's more a case of fallout road than Falls road, you are comparing a spat over nationality with Iran's insane twelvers who actually believe something akin to Armageddon is a prerequisite for their destiny.

Here's something interesting, it would appear that Obama's decision to go down the appeasement road has made some strange bedfellows to oppose his policy.

http://www.debka.com/article/23323/Israel-and-Saudi-Arabia-are-coordinating-policies-to-counter-US-d%C3%A9tente-with-Iran-

I'm pointing out that to reach agreement you have to start talking at some stage. I realise that that's something you would never do.

Here's something interesting, it would appear that Obama's decision to go down the appeasement road has made some strange bedfellows to oppose his policy.

http://www.debka.com/article/23323/Israel-and-Saudi-Arabia-are-coordinating-policies-to-counter-US-détente-with-Iran-

An interesting paragraph from that. I am afraid that Obama might turn out to be our Neville Chamberlain.

President Obama knows that Israel’s military capacity is up to a solo operation against Iran. Tehran, however, though conscious of the IDF’s high military, technological and cyber warfare capabilities, is convinced that Israel like the United States has lost the appetite for a military initiative.

So the ever-reliable and never-misleading Debka, assures the world that the IDF can take out the entire Iranian nuclear programme on its own.

So why is Netanhayu so desperate to get the US involved? Why does he not just pull off another Osirak? Perhaps he (unlike Debka) actually appreciates that the scale of the Iranian nuclear set-up would be far too big and complex a target for the IDF to take on alone.

Plus given the fact that Israel sits on a significant nuclear capability means that MAD is the likely deterrence future for the Middle East much as it has been for much of the rest of the globe.

So why is Netanhayu so desperate to get the US involved?

It is pretty obvious that it would be much safer and effective to have the US involved. America has many more advanced jets and stronger bunker busters. There are other sources that say Israel could do it alone, but not nearly as decisively. Netanhayu wants to completely destroy Iran's nuclear capability for as long as possible.