Shai -------------------------
Thank you for a broad info about Iran, I agree with 87% of what you mentioned, Iranian always are very supportive of each other no matter what will happen. During the 1980 war Iraq had a hard time to dominate iran's land even though they were supplied with WMD from Germany and weaponary from USA, the reason was there were plenty of young adults that fighting for their country and did not care what will happen to them. At the moment Iran's population has about 45% young adult ages 15 to 35.

You mentioned
"With respect to the Iranian nuclear program, most Persians that I know are not in favour of it at all. They can’t understand why the government wants to spend billions upon billions of dollars on nuclear plants (twenty or more already planned) when they have so many other ways to create the energy they need. Poverty is on the increase and illiteracy is rising, so many wonder why the money can’t be spent on programs to reduce these problems."

Even Iran is the 4th larget oil and 2nd largest LNG producer still has to import a lot of oil from other countries including Russia. Irans power and energy producing facilities are pretty old such as DAMS, and Power houses, these resources are built during the Shah era with help of German companies like Siemens. Iranian do not have any new parts to replace the old one's with, in return They have to refurbish them and they will not last long under the load of constant useage.
As we have seen and heard on the news that most of domestic planes that were purchased by the Shah from USA are so old that they crash because of the part failure and that causes a large amount of casulties. The raeson was only because of the sanction that USA forced the UN to force on Iran and that they do not payback the 35 Billion $'s back to Iran. The money that they owed to Shah. This action forced Iran to get closer to the eastern and Asian countries such as Russia and China. Iran has been a survivour, say 2550 years of it. If they were able to stay on their feet this long then they will find a way to stay on their feet for as long as the earth and universe exist. But one thing is very important though and that is that the only way USA can stop Iran's nuclear activities is to try to open their door for discussion and promotions with a freindlier approch, otherwise the way that Iran is taking steps ahead to get closer to be a super power in middle east is on the clock and it is ticking.

To Anderson--------------------

"I think the key words here are "potential" and "preparing". I know that some see it differently on this board, but my feeling is that if Iran has a WMD, it won't be if, it will be when will they use it and against whom."
Iran doesn't have any WMD. None. Zero. Zip. And yes, that HAS been verified by the U.N.'s I.A.E.A.
I know you (and others) can't accept the fact that Iran has a right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which they are a signatory, to develop non-military nuclear energy programs, but they do. They also have the right to develop the ability to manufacture and refine uranium fuel for such reactors under the terms of the treaty. Refining nuclear fuel for reactors is NOT the same as refining weapons-grade plutonium; uranium is only a the trigger for such weapons and alone, it poses no threat as a nuclear bomb.
For the past two years, we have been involved in covert intelligence operations against Iran. It's widely known that American and British intel and special forces have waged a campaign to stir ethnic and sectarian conflicts in order to destablize the government in Tehran. Satellite surveillance of suspected nuclear facilities have gone on unabated and the areas under consideration for attack have been located and thoroughly mapped. It has been reported in the European press that the idea is that regime change in Iran can be achieved by sectarian opposition, but the reality is that the Iranians will consistently rally behind a wartime government against foreign aggression. In fact, the entire Middle East and beyond would rise up against US interventionism.
If you think we have problems in Iraq, then you haven't seen anything yet.
President Bush signed off on plans to invade Iran in June of last year. What that means is that the U.S. and Israel are in a state of readiness and are prepared to launch an attack; all that remains is to set a date for the event. Recent reports such as my original post state that Israel will be ready by late March to effect a bombing raid similar to their attack on Iraq's nuclear facilities at Osiraq in 1981. The thing is... Iran is ready and they WILL fight back.
So there is NO psychological deterrent. Not against Iran anyway.

"As for the Russian answer...I just don't know how far I trust that government to be a "key" player. I will have to think on that one."
Surely you're aware of Putin's approval and subsequent sale of defensive missile technology to Iran and the United State's stated opposition to that sale. You should be. It made headlines... even at Faux sNooze. Russia sold Tehran an air defense system designed to shoot down aircraft, cruise missiles and precision-guided weapons, upgraded Russian-made fighter jets, and submarines for their small naval fleet last May. Iran has also upgraded its Shahab-3 missile systems, which can reach targets in Israel, so if they were a threat to Israel they would have attacked already.
China's strategic interests in Iran are high as well. In 2004, China's state-owned oil trading company signed a 25-year deal to import 110 million tons of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from Iran. This was followed by a much larger deal between another of China's state-owned oil companies and Iran. That deal is worth about $100 billion and allows China to import a further 250 million tons of LNG from Iran over a 25-year period. In addition to LNG, Iran will provide China with 150,000 barrels per day of crude oil over the same period. Also Iran sigend a large multy million $ contract with Japan to drill for new oil exploration in the south east of country.If the U.S. engages Iran in a war similar to the one we have in Iraq, those contracts will be null. Do you think China will just sit back and allow that to happen???
There's substantial Chinese investment in Iranian energy exploration, drilling and production, as well as in petrochemical and natural gas infrastructure. Total Chinese investment targeted toward Iran's energy sector could exceed a further $100 billion over 25 years. At the end of this year just past, China became Iran's top oil export market. Since we don't export all that much in the way of petroleum to the Chinese, who do YOU think they'll back in a shooting match?

to Herbi HanCOCK----------------------

I might have a putty mouth but I like it.
How many damn war you as an American want to get involved with? Every time a new damn president was elected there was a new war with a diffrent country. I do not understand what is it that every country is just againt USA. Why this doesn't happen to any other countries. I wonder why no country wants to terrories Italy, Germany, England, Sweden, Finland, Australia, France, and on and on.
What is your answer to that?
By the way, FYI I am an Iranian and proud of it. So what?

Please ponder on these divine words [Words of God] in quotation marks below, which contain the answers to the issues you've been discussing. It seems everyone is looking for a band-aid solution and not really looking for the root cause of our planet's problems.

Our main problem is disunity among people which can be solved by focusing hard on bringing about justice to the peoples of the world. Unity and Justice go hand-in-hand. Here's what GOD via His Manifestations [Prophets/Messengers] is teaching humanity in this day and age (see below):

"The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established."

I wish you all a happy and a blessed day,

What the Iranian people feel, as a whole, is difficult to determine without engaging them in a direct and personal way. Even then, many of them may be unwilling to speak openly for fear of recrimination. You will find that this is true not only in Iran, but in other countries as well, especially where recent immigrants are involved.

The majority of mass media in Iran is controlled, in whole or in part, by the government. Access to outside news sources is frowned upon by the state, such that the seizure of satellite dishes by police has gone up dramatically in recent months. Western music was also recently banned; a measure that hasn't been in place since the early days of the revolution. Basically, the government in Tehran knows that a sure way to control the ideas coming out of people is to control what kind of ideas are getting into people.

My own experience with people from Iran, in Canada and the United States, has been fantastic. The Persians are a truly remarkable people; bright, studious, passionate and extremely helpful. Most of the people I've spoken with would like to return to Iran some day (many still have family there), but they're waiting for a change in government. Iranians are very business-oriented and many of them would like to see a much less insular economy, something more in line with their traditional trading role on the ancient silk road between China and the West. As it is, Iran is scheduled to become the pipeline capital of Asia Minor, but that's a pond from which the small fish are excluded. And most of the 70 million people living in Iran consider themselves to be very small fish indeed.

With respect to the Iranian nuclear program, most Persians that I know are not in favour of it at all. They can't understand why the government wants to spend billions upon billions of dollars on nuclear plants (twenty or more already planned) when they have so many other ways to create the energy they need. Poverty is on the increase and illiteracy is rising, so many wonder why the money can't be spent on programs to reduce these problems.

One of the main reasons that people inside Iran are silently opposed to their own nuclear program is that they are NOT stupid. They know what's going on. Can you imagine the uproar that would take place in the United States if most of its diplomats and ambassadors were suddenly replaced with Marine Corps generals? And what if most of Congress was similarly displaced? And what if the government decided to replace the deans of all major U.S. universities with hardcore, evangelist, Baptist preachers? The notion sounds laughable, but that's exactly what has happened in Iran. Virtually every government ministry in Iran is controlled by the military, which is in turn controlled by a Supreme religious body.

The Iranians have been conditioned to living under "strong" leaders. And it's not just them, either. Most of the people in the Middle East feel this way.

Right now, they see that their "strongman" is having success in his struggle against the "enemy". It's the old "my Dad can beat up your Dad" theme that everybody remembers from early grade school. And no one believed it more than the kid whose Dad honed his skills to a fine edge on Mom and the kids.

Sad, but true.

Since you appear knowledgeable, allow me to ask: my reading has suggested that the Iranian people as a whole, opposition or not, strongly favor a nuclear program. Thus, foreign opposition to such a program risks alienating all Iranians, and giving the regime a chance to solidify its support.

What do you think?

It appears that an equal number of people are tempted to advocate the bombing of Iran as are predisposed to accepting it as a member of the so-called "nuclear club". But this is not a time when we can afford to yield to our temptations.

Iran's political leader clearly fancies himself a simple man of the people, with a simple wish: the undisputed worldwide dominion of Islam. In his opinion it's simply a matter of time before that end, but he has no compunction against hastening the result.

He has clearly stated his belief on a number of occasions that the Iranian revolution initiated by the late Ayatollah Khomeini is the best model for achieving an Islamic conquest of the earth. To that end, he has breathed new life into the Qods Force, a special branch of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard charged with spreading the movement to every part of the globe. It's no accident that his missionary force is so-named because the word "qods" is also the Arabic name for Jerusalem.

The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nezhad, plays a fine game of "walking the line" when it comes to the letter of the law (or the letter of any legal agreement, including the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT]) while intermittently interjecting combustible phrases into a highly inflammable debate, often with an air of earnest innocence. Most of these barbs are fired in the direction of Israel, but they are aimed to offend Jews worldwide.

To my mind, it's clear that Iran desires the sort of strategic deterrence that is inherent in the possession of nuclear weapons, but it's not a strictly defensive wish. I have no doubt that these weapons, in the hands of an aggressive regime, would underwrite a wide range of non-nuclear conflicts by neutralising the prospect that the regime could ultimately be held responsible for its actions.

Iran supposedly has no nuclear weapons right now, yet every tactical report published to-date concerning this dilemma unequivocally states that Israel cannot manage to strike more than a few targets in Iran without resorting to a sustained nuclear missile assault; they just don't have the resources to do it. It's just too far away and Iran is a very large and mountainous country. Wargames conducted by the United States as part of the Millennium Challenge program predicted the loss of almost the entire American fleet in the Persian Gulf unless the U.S. resorted to a broad nuclear pre-emption in the early stages of such a war involving Iran. It's difficult to imagine a situation in which the U.S. or Israel could launch such a conflagration without being completely ostracised by the entire world community; we're talking about the use of 100+ nuclear weapons against a state that doesn't even have them. The best strategy from a defensive Iranian point-of-view would seem to be a non-nuclear one.

That's exactly what Iran says. They don't want nuclear weapons.

So, let me ask, why does one of the most-resource-rich countries on the planet want to get involved with the highly technical mess that brought us such past glories as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl? Let's not even mention the millennia-long concern of storing the nuclear by-products of these processes or the dangers posed by the toxic chemistries involved.

Iran could lead the world in developing wave, solar and wind energy technologies (the country is ideally situated for all three) but it would rather develop nuclear power. Interesting.

And the agreement that gives Iran the right to master the complete fuel cycle is the NPT. It stipulates that any signatory thereto who promises not to build nuclear weapons and distribute them to others may develop technologies for the enrichment of radioactive elements to levels consistent with civilian power generation programs, but not to the levels required for nuclear arms. The NPT makes no provision for the fact that the same equipment can be used for either purpose; it's a loophole that the Iranian regime has been exploiting flagrantly.

Are we to forget that Iran hid its nuclear development plans from the world for 18 years until they were exposed in 2002? Had it not signed the NPT prior to the time when its secret facilities were revealed?

Most of Iran's arguments on the nuclear issue are specious and misleading diatribes; like the one it uses to avoid the Russian proposal for uranium enrichment external to its own borders. The Iranian president said that it was not reasonable for Iran to conduct uranium enrichment in Russia because there was no 100% guarantee that it would get the fuel it needed. All phases of the nuclear cycle, he declared, must be completed in Iran. Well, how about the fact that Iran's uranium deposits will run out before the Russian-built Bushehr reactor reaches the end of its lifecycle? And what of the 19 other reactors that are scheduled to be built after it? Will the country's uranium not need to come from outside the country?

A fundamental right of any person or nation is inalienable only within the spectrum afforded by the reasonable expression of that right. As the old saying goes... your right to swing your fist stops at your neighbour's nose. There are reasonable limits to the freedom of expression, so why shouldn't the development of nuclear power be similarly constrained?

Iran's dossier must be referred to the UN Security Council for the consideration of sanctions. It must be done very soon, and it requires the support of both Russia and China. The world must stand steadfast and united against the danger of Iranian nuclear-tipped diplomacy or face the consequences that will surely multiply in the vacuum created by our inaction.

I do however hope that you're not classing me with any "Iran apologists."

The Iranian regime is detestable on multiple grounds. I am merely skeptical of (1) the possibility of denying it the Bomb indefinitely and (2) the utility of futile attacks that can at best delay their program while antagonizing the entire nation.

Let's not forget how the Soviets got that bomb...

As JJ pointed out for anyone interested in learning something, Iran has tailored its program to resist air attack. How successful they've been, we may or may not find out.

Meanwhile, we are supposed to be afraid of Iran because it might hate us so much as to make nukes available to our enemies like Osama.

How, exactly, is bombing them going to help with that problem? It will go miles towards driving the potential opposition into the arms of the mullahs.

The best thing I can see to do is to admit the obvious, that Iran will have nukes someday, and trade assistance for liberalization. That's not ideal, but then, Pakistan's having nukes ain't so ideal either.

Remember, the answer to which nuclear Muslim nation's intel services have aided al-Qaeda in the past and may be doing so today? is not "Iran," it's "Pakistan."

First Larry D, you have a potty mouth

Next, I have a question for you,

Why do you love the terrorists sponsering, terrorist loving, Iranians so much that you stick up for those lousy Bast**** that are responsibile for the killing of so many innocent prople thruout the world.

Or are you one of them?

It's obvious that you don't know much about the history of US, Iranian relations. If you bother to find out about the Iran Hostage event 25 years ago, you just might get a little common sense about youself, which would obviously be a marked change for your mentality.

Israel wants to shape the region for its own interest ? Let them do it themselves and stop using US military as a proxy for Israel .