Do you think whether american can prevent iran enrichment's?
536536
prevent!!!!!!!!!!!!!\ndon't you mean stop?\nand no why should you\nyou started the thing of in the first place\ndropped the bomb\nnow you want to stop it\n\ngood luck with that\ndon't think you will be making many new friends in the world
954934
Who cares what those people think.  I'm more interested in preventing iran from franchising out nuclear weapons to all the arab states and then blowing up the world as part of jihad.  Whatever it takes to prevent that is justified and if that includes turning Iraq, Iran, Syria and whomever else needs it into a sheet of glass because the liberals in this country won't allow the necessary oversite to prevent this in a humane way, then so be it.\n\nWhat matters is preventing world war 3, not satisfying idiot liberals.
104588
It would take a coalition of countries and U.N. resolve plus resolutions, and getting Congress to approve.  Yes it is possible, however no one wants more war so a lot of diplomacy will be tried before it comes down to an actual war.  Is the U.S. able the answer to that is also a yes.  The U.S. is able to do most everything it sets it's mind to do.  I believe that there will be a settlement with Iran being willing to allow inspectors in to supervise the Nuclear Operations. If they intend this power only to make electricity from they should have no problem complying with that U.N. request.
1037456
I am sorry I did not understand part of your question but I can tell you that America Is not against the Iranian people.  It has serious concerns about the extremists in the government with an anti American and anti Israeli attitude that are threatening the world by attempting to develop nuclear weapons.  Let us hope this can be resolved peacefully.
637318
they ain't gonna. u.s. is hypocrits. they worry about iran while we are sitting on our tons and tons of nuclear arsenal.
240157
It now appears a foregone conclusion that Iran will continue its nuclear program no matter what the United States and European Union offer to stop it. A military strike would likely be futile, since Iran has hardened and dispersed its nuclear complex. \n\nA war, even a limited one, will almost certainly raise oil prices to recession-inducing levels, as Iran cuts itself off from global markets.\n\nThere are fearfully powerful arguments against the use of the military option. But multiplied together, squared, and then cubed, the weight of these arguments does not come close to matching the case for us to stop, by whatever means may be necessary, Iran from becoming a nuclear power. \n\nIf Iran gets safely and unmolested to nuclear status, it will be a threshold moment in the history of the world, up there with the Bolshevik Revolution and the coming of Hitler. \n\nAnd the kind of society we live in and cherish in the West will change beyond recognition. We balk now at intrusive government measures to tap our phones or other intrusions into our civil liberties. Imagine how much more our freedoms will be curtailed if our governments fear we are just one telephone call or e-mail, one plane journey or truckload, one lead-lined cargo ship away from another Hiroshima. \n\nYou ask what are the odds of an attack, over 50%, there are timeposts that military tacticians, i'm sure are looking at. The estimated dates of an operational nuke in Iran is anywhere between 2007 and 2012. \n\nThere are reports that the Israel deadline for strikes against Iran are the end of March. American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted. \n\nTehran has confirmed that it will retaliate if attacked, in the form of ballistic missile strikes directed against Israel (CNN, 8 Feb 2005). These attacks, could also target US military facilities in Iraq and Persian Gulf, which would immediately lead us into a scenario of military escalation and all out war.
354538
If the USA or the UN do not get Iran under control--YES.
537394
of Course ! that will be one of US hiding reason after WMD for invade Iran. Bush will take that option coz Iran is a threat for economic and politic of US.especially for rhe democracy program in middle east.
403966
As an Iranian I'm so ashamed on some treatments of my homeland government, but I hope at least one from White House read my message, suppose Brazil have the "Nuclear Knowledge" and US have not. What you will to do? This is the right of any country to increase its peaceful knowledge. Why in the middle east Israel, India, Pakistan have this technology? Which country has used the Nuclear Bomb? Iran.....? or ... World will not forget murders at Japan, Vietnam, Iraq, and so on... \nBut what I want to say, all American people, you must know, Iranians are opposed to crimes, it is ponderable in events of Iran history.\nHoping Mr. President Bush considers the various aspects of the task as more possible.
28504
Of course, unless the USA (or Europe) bombs their reactors first. That would be a nice mess. It's a prestige thing, they feel inferior to Pakistan, India, China, and Europe...\n\nThe real question (as with N. Korea, or Israel) is how would you or they know for sure without a test? It is possible that there's an error in the calculations and the bomb will fizzle (see Tom Clancy's "The Sum of All Fears", the book not the stupid movie.) The Americans initially avoided these technical problems by building a prototype the size of a truck - which is difficult to deliver a few thousand miles without intercept unless you have air superiority (which Iran doesn't).\n\nSo, (possible) possession of WMD is a mind game and a double-dare game, unless you're sure they work. GWB has proven with his invasion of Iraq that mind games only work on smart people. \n \nYou want people sufficiently sure that you have something ready for delivery that they don't dare attack - it's too late, too risky (like with N. Korea). With Iraq, the USA was very sure Saddam wasn't there yet.  \n\nFor better protection, you have to prove they work. After they're tested and proven, the trick is to have enough of them, scattered all over the country, to sufficiently retaliate if attacked. I.e., "attack us and Israel and the Saudi Oil fields get it, if we can't reach the USA."\n\nSo there's the answer: They'll play denial and mind games until they have a dozen or two, then they'll test one - they have lotsa desert to play with. Meanwhile, they'll work at other toys that can defeat the Patriot Missle systems.\n\nWill they give them to terrorists? Not likely (but it's always good for a threat, and rogue sympathizers are always a risk). An atomic bomb works best as a retaliation threat. As far as taking out actual armies and fleets, it's not that great and nobody's going to group together too close when the threat is there. \n\nThey also know that the moment one goes off anywhere outside Iran unprovoked, all bets are off- shock and awe from all directions. I think at that point, the USA would be happy to nuke the big bits, then give the rest of Iran to Russia or even China - "take the oil, just kill anyone associated with making the bombs or using them..."
516748
A nuclear capable Iran is a threat to the world--not just to the USA and I am sorry but this not a case of "so and so has nuclear power and so can we".  If your a country that is threatening others then stopping a nuclear program will is a must.\n\nEvery effort at diplomacy will be done but if that doesnt work--then I imagine they will take out Irans Nuclear site. I say "they" because it wont be the USA alone--in fact I do not think we will do it--it will probally be Israel.
810116
Does not look like it.\n\nWe are on the brink of the collapse of the post 1989 efforts by the US to prevent nuclear proliferation.\n\nThere is no consensus over a strategy in the US over the issue, other than the declarations by all Politicians that proliferation will not be tolerated. \n\nAmerica rhetoric has been shown to be toothless. \nIn the case of Pakistan and India.\n\nIt is entirely possible that Pakistan either instigated or allowed 9/11 as a response to the puny sanctions imposed after their nuclear test. \nThe sanctions threatened the long term, Cold War, alliance between the US and Pakistan. \nAn alliance which blocked India's ability to invade and occupy Pakistan as a response to Pakistan's continual terrorist provocations in Kashmir.\n\n"See what we can do if you try to isolate us"\n\nPressure and carrots on N. Korea have proven equally futile.\n\nForce was not considered an option by policy makers, as action against the 1 million strong NK army with Seoul within artillery range would have ensured massive destruction \n\nThe only levers of power are held by China, which has chosen not to exercise them until after N K recent test.\n\nAnd then only to push them into the interminable six party talks. No doubt designed by the Chinese to further split the US allies and weak US influence in the region.\n\nBush's efforts in Iraq should in my view be seen as a belated attempt to use US force as a way to intimidate Iran into giving up ite nuclear ambitions.\n\nIraq was rightly seen as an easy target to make this point.\n\nIt worked on Colonel Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi.who admitted and ended his non-declared nuclear programme in 2003 \n\nIn Iraq the indiscriminate sectarian wanton destruction engaged in by those opposing US policy, has tied down the US army in a quagmire with no seeming option but to admit impotence and leave.\n\nThe US political establishment has still not taken a final decision on what it's stance will be\n\nHence the timely Question.\n\nIs there another possible solution?
307286
I think there is a strong chance that the War on Terror is going to continue into Iran.\n\n"A recent poll shows six in ten Americans think a new world war is coming: the same poll says about 50 percent approve of the dropping of the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II. Somewhat inexplicably, about two-thirds say nuking those two cities was "unavoidable." One can only wonder, then, what their reaction will be to this ominous news, revealed in a recent issue of The American Conservative by intelligence analyst Philip Giraldi:\n\n"The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing – that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack – but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections."
856738
I've been saying this for months. I've told EVERYBODY that after the elections, the U.S., Great Britain, and/or Israel WILL strike Iran.\n\nThink about it...  . . .We're not about to let them get NUCLEAR BOMBS.
349092
Yes I think they will.\nAll countires act in their best interest.  Which is what the USA are doing at the moment.\nRussia and China would not support sanctions on Iran as it is seriously bad for their economies.  China is particularly reliant on Iranian Oil & Gas.
472594
No, I don't believe so. I think all of the rhetoric is what you call the October surprise. It's voting time, and all the subjects are coming to the surface just like the last time America voted. You have got to figure, that Russia or China, either one could supply Iran with what ever they wanted anyway. Iran hasn't gotten involved with the Iraq situation, and they could have at anytime. I really believe it's Bush pushing American Military again.
392943
hope full it want come to that, however the only way to insure that Iran's nuclear capability it completely erased is to use a small tactual nuke. it would be kinda a bunker buster and while it would re lase radiation it wouldnt be a huge amount.