I've seen a couple threads and lots of discussion about Iran, should we attack or not, is it a pro-Israel media and political structure driving it etc

But I'm curious how many people here on CI actually agree with the premise: Is Iran a threat?

Are they working on nukes or not is moot if you don't think they are a threat. After all, China and Russia have/had nukes during the coldwar and didn't use them.

Let's not discuss *if* and let me just ask: assume Iran is developing nukes, would they use them? If so, on whom? (Us? Israel?)

*why*?

Well, I'm probably in a minority, but yes, I do believe it. First, it is not that Iran will necessarily use a nuke, it is that its nuclear shield will provide the kind of cover to continue to engage in the kind of the proxy attacks it has long carried out with impunity. Second, there is no need at all for any kind of ground invasion, much less a military strike, rather simply a strong and determined focus to confront the evil of the regime for what it is, and support the people of Iran, overwhelming numbers of whom want democracy and self-rule.

This speech gives more specifics,

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1726394/posts

How many Americans realize that Iran declared war on us 27 years ago - in 1979 - and has been killing Americans ever since?

He is only the latest in a series of Iranian leaders who have vowed death to us and visited death upon us. Our troops in Iraq are killed by Iranian weapons paid for with Iranian money, smuggled into Iraq by Iranian logistics, and utilized by Iranian-trained terrorists. A couple of years ago you needed a security clearance to know this. Today it is common knowledge. Iran is the centerpiece of the assault against us and the other countries in the civilized world.

Ahmadinejad has recruited and is training 52000 ѕυιcιdє terrorists called the Commando of Voluntary Martyrs. An Iranian Revolutionary Guard intelligence officer bragged that "We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization and for the uprooting of the Americans and English ... There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them."

Our growing challenge, however, is that Iran is not alone in its rhetoric, intent or capacity to threaten the security of the U.S.

Look again at the Iranians' strategy. A couple of months ago Ahmadinejad signed a mutual defense pact with his pal, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Two dictators, awash in petrodollars, and besotted with hatred for the United States.

We have forgotten our history. We have been here before.

We only entered the First World War after German U-boats sank American civilian and commercial ships on the North Atlantic. World War I was "the war to end war," and with the defeat of the German armies, it seemed that peace was destined to last a long time. But it did not last even one generation. It did not last because we failed to recognize the evil of fascism, and because we allowed the fascists to grow stronger and stronger, until they felt capable of defeating us.

We left Great Britain alone to face the nαzιs for several years, and despite the Mussolini's entrance, we only engaged in the Second World War after the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Germany, Italy and Japan. They had nothing in common, so we weren't willing to see the axis of evil gathering around us.

We entered the Cold War only after Stalin's aggression in the Middle East and Greece. In every case the evil was obvious, the threat indisputable, but the willingness to confront was in every case late and prohibitively costly. Are we willing to see the storm gathering around us and act before it is too late? Was 9-11 not enough? Have our memories faded? Or will it take something even more devastating?

When Winston Churchill wrote his great history of the Second World War, he began the first volume-"The Gathering Storm"— with a short description: "How the English-speaking peoples through their unwisdom, carelessness, and good nature allowed the wicked to rearm."

We were part of that moment of folly, and we paid a terrible price for it on the battlefields of that war. We are running the same risk today, and we are again acting carelessly, unwisely and we are permitting the wicked to grow stronger and stronger.

It's time to stop dreaming and start acting. We have to bring the fight to our enemies, and that means we have to do a lot more than respond to their attacks in Iraq. We must go after the regimes that recruit, pay, train and arm terrorists. I am not-NOT-talking about sending more American troops onto foreign battlefields, or even dropping precision bombs from safe altitudes. I am talking about political and economic warfare, to bring down the terror regimes in Tehran and Damascus. The best way to do that is to support their own people, most of whom are eager for freedom.

A free Iran will be our friend, not an implacable enemy. We know that is true, because public opinion polls taken by the regime itself show that more than seventy percent of Iranians want to choose their own system of government and elect their own leaders.

And we know it is true because the Iranian regime is frantically trying to isolate the Iranian people from contact with the free world. Satellite dishes are torn down, dissidents are arrested, tortured and executed. High speed internet is banned. Surviving vestiges of a free press are shut down. Those are the actions of a regime that fears its people, and knows that the desire for freedom can destroy the Islamic fascist tyranny.

A free Iran will change the world, because it will deprive the terrorists of their single greatest source of support, and isolate the likes of Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong 'il. Why is a free Iran and Iraq so essential? Because the United States nor any western country will be able on its own to defeat radical Islamic fascism. We must create an environment where moderate Islam - whether Sunni or Shi'ia or any other strain - combats and suppresses its radical elements. I believe the best way to accomplish this is through democratic self rule.

you picked a wrong forum to debate, I don't think anyone here believes Iran is a threat.

I wasn't exactly expecting a 'debate'. I was quite honest when I brought it up.

I have been reading this forum and if I'm reading the posts right, I was surprised at how many CI posters take the zionist propaganda as fiat that Iran is a threat. The only variation in the posts was "what are we going to do about it" and that the war/invasion option wasn't the only option.

However, I didn't see a lot of "let's do nothing"/they're not a threat. I was surprised to read that and thought id post where we take a step backward in the discussion to see how so many got to that assumption.

I don't know why every discussion about Iran turns to Israel. It's in my opinion perfectly possible to not support or want to support the Jєωs in the slightest and yet not believe that everything is fine and dandy with the Iranian regime, that's all. America built international and strategic alliances all around the world especially in the Communist bloc during the Cold War and strongly supported indigenous movements like the solidarity movement in Poland.

As someone who has chatted quite a bit with Iranians living in Iran

Well, Telesphorus, so what do you think their opinion of their leadership is? Are they more or less satisfied with it? More than 70 percent of Iranians according to the regime's own polls are not, and the Green Movement in 2009 numbered in the several millions. I see no reason why what happened in the Communist world can't happen to the Middle East, and it's certainly worth trying for.

It's a huge mistake to see the American desire to impose itself on Iran as being in harmony with Iranian self-determination.

Well, maybe the converse is true. Iranian self-determination could be in the larger interests of the region and the world, and therefore worth supporting. The same was true of Poland, and wavering in the face of the Soviet Union would not have been in America's best interest. And the numbers in both cases are massive, so why not support the people, why not condemn publicly the regime's excesses against their own citizens? There is nothing to be lost, and perhaps a future ally to be gained.

Moreover, the regime's dealings with the world have hardly exuded moderation or transparency, particularly where uranium enrichment is concerned. The site at Natanz involved uranium enriched below 4% while the one in Qom was found to be at 20%. Just yesterday I think there was a new report from their own diplomats concerning this.

Well, I owe you a more detailed answer, and I'll give that later, but just to be clear, I'm not speaking of using force, I thought I made that clear. I'm speaking of withstanding dictatorial regimes, speaking out against their crimes, and standing up for the interests of the people, just as America and others did with the erstwhile Soviet Union.