![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png)
Originally Posted by
Watcher In The Middle
Originally posted by JeffC:
....for Iran. What they have gotten so far out of all of this is a ratcheting up of economic sanctions, along with a concerted effort by the West (US, in the lead) to cripple Iran's economic access to capital (at least through the IRGC).
The real problem is that IF the 2007 NIE is valid in it's conclusions (and again, assume it is valid), there is actually (from a political viewpoint) greater justification for continued, if not increased economic sanctions against Iran, with the goal of further extending out their development cycle in any attempts to develop a nuclear capability.
From a purely political standpoint (if I'm a pol) with the 2007 NIE being out there, I don't want military intervention, but I certainly want to make sure that Iran knows that any path they take toward developing a nuclear capability will be as expensive and drawn out as it can possibly be (with our complements).
And if Iran did in fact reverse their trend toward developing a nuclear capability in 2003, and it can be even partially attributed to the effects of economic sanctions at that time, well, what's the reason for the West to discontinue those?
I mean, if the goal for Iran was to deal something that was mostly all smoke & mirrors for something tangible, well, looks like that deal is blown. The 2007 NIE just blew that type of deal away.
I'm looking at this from a pol standpoint and trying to figure out where all the 80% who are pretty much in the middle of the road are going to go with all of this.
Thoughts?
Bookmarks