Isn't it time to take out the Iranian threat before it is too late?

You are most likely correct. If we wait until they have the nuclear weapon, it will be way too late because that first weapon is not going to be tested at sea or in the desert, no sir, ground zero for that test is going to be either Israel or the good ole USA.

The UN is a joke, period, nothing more to say about that except we need to take our dollars elsewhere and kick them out.

The democratic startegy is one of weakness, appeasement and surrender. They will want to sit down and talk with Iran which worked well for Chamberlain with the Nazis.

Do you know the difference between the Nazis and Islamofascists? One is from Germany the other is from Iran.

Yes, on the surface, that seems like the best plan. That is probably the course I would recommend.

However, with Russia and China supposedly providing nuclear technology to any country who wants it, I'm afraid the genie has been released from the bottle. We can take out Iran and hope to not start a nuclear conflagration. But, there are many more rogue nations who have their eyes on nuclear weapons as the means to strengthen their position and ideology on the world stage.

Let's get down to the bottom line. The only reason that we negotiate with countries like Russia and Pakistan is because they have a nuclear capability. I would say that if Pakistan did not have a nuclear capability, we would have gone in and taken out Bin Laden a few months after 9/11.

Instead, we honor Pakistan's sovereignty and respect their borders. Other countries have presumably taken note of this and have quickly determined that the only way that they can maintain their own sovereignty is to have a nuclear capability.

But, we cannot stop nuclear proliferation by warfare alone. We need to work on parallel diplomatic and technological paths.

At present, those paths would seem to lead nowhere. At this point in time, it looks like civilization is careening at light speed to the apocalypse.

But, can we stop it? I don't know, but we can attempt to use every technological and diplomatic means to reduce the threat.

One possible solution is to accept the fact that these rogue nations will gain the capability and then determine how to reduce the threat of them actually initiating a nuclear war.

One main solution to me is the education of the masses. Once a majority of people become literate in world history, science and technology, they usually become unbounded by fundamental theocracy and understand that world domination and the desire to force their religious dogma on others should not be part of their goal set.

If and when the U.S. is able to determine the extent of nuclear fissile material development in Iraq, a decision would be shortly forthcoming. If we've offered to develop nuclear power for them, we must feel they are nowhere close to that, let alone nuclear fissile material development for warheads. But even the mucky stuff, if detonated conventionally, would cause problems in the attack zone.

The greater issue is not whether Iran may have nuclear material, but who they are willing to pass that on to when they do have it: Pakistani extremists? Saudi Shi'ite extremists? Iraqi Shi'ites militias? Syria? Hezbollah? Hamas? Muslim Brotherhood? The list is long and ugly.

Why the world wishes to SPEAK to such a backward, aggressive, totalitarian state is beyond me. It is cruel for the people on the street, but a tight blockade of Iran and North Korea for a six month period should make them play ball, and fast. The world needs the U.S., the world doesn't need Kim or Khameini and his cohorts. Their constant agitation and threatening of the innocent people of the world is not productive and shouldn't be tolerated in the 21st century. Enough is enough. The world will find peace when each man and woman can reasonably expect to determine their own destiny, right now Iran and N. Korea are diametrically opposed to that reality, and negotiation and appeasement only legitimizes their backwardness to their own population and to their miseducated supporters.

Lack of freedom is not unique to Iran, there are places that are far worse, and the US is doing very little about these dictatorships.

there is wisdom in patience, and the Iranians feel the heat all the time, bombs are only one way to fight them.

compared to the cold war with the soviets, which was also a conflict of ideologies, the conflict with Iran/ Muslim Terror is minor.

Why Iran? North Korea is the one with the nukes. Iran is still 10-15 years away from having the capacity to even make nuclear weapons.

North Korea is the one we should be worried about, they are prepared to have nuclear testing, and South Korea and China were the only countries to say anything!

Learn thy enemey, even if i disagree with what the US AND Iran are doing, I would still like to hear what both sides have to say!

Let me get this straight - because a sovereign country might be creating technology that we already have (and using for our energy needs) and (like us) make bombs, you want to invade this country? We have already invaded and overthrown 2 countries governments, when the evidence has proven that neither of them was a threat to the U.S. Should we just become the 'british empire' of the world and overthrow all governments because they might disagree with us?

Should we invade every country because they have their own culture? We can work for better worker rights, womens rights, human rights, health rights, better government by other means than bullets.

Your type of rhetoric is poison.

The Iranian President is a joke. They have no missiles that can reach the US, so let someone else take them out. Let 's stay on the road of diplomacy.

No, its easier to "take out" the video game mentality idiots like you.

The answer is simple: disarm Israel. Create a nuclear free region .

And "the Boogie man" will go awaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay !!!!!!!

No we shouldn't attack countries untill they attack us. The Soviet union threatend us for 70 years but we never attacked each other and yes they had nuclear weapons and other WMDs.

bush already denied that debate with him. my question is isn't it time to wrap up iraq and afghanistan first before starting more unfinished wars?