REPLIES TO THE CURRENT QUESTION

Our question last week was:

What should the American response be if Iran announces it has the atomic bomb, or if we have unquestioned proof that it does?

Here are your answers.  The name of a writer is included only if he or she actually placed a name at the end of the message.  Otherwise, we assume the writer wished anonymity:

What should the American response be if Iran announces
it has the atomic bomb, or if we have unquestioned proof that it does?

Nuke. Rinse. Repeat.

Andy B.
NYC

What should the American response be if Iran announces it has the atomic bomb, or if we have unquestioned proof that it does?

Once again, two questions for the price of one.  And, once again two distinct answers; or, one answer and some fuzzy thinking on my part.

Question #1: Iran announces it has an Atomic Bomb.

Answer #1:  Take them at their word and then make sure that they don't have 2 Atomic Bombs.  Give them a 24 hour warning to clear all of the people away from their nuclear sites and then destroy the sites by whatever means necessary.  Since the question didn't ask about political or policy ramifications of our response, I can save space by not bringing them in.

Question #2:  We have unquestioned proof that Iran has an atomic bomb, how should we respond?

Answer #2:  When did we get this "unquestioned proof"?  Who is in the White House?  Who is in control of the Congress?  If the current administration presented proof of anything, including proof that the sun rises in the East it would be questioned endlessly by the current Congress, the current Democratic Presidential candidate and the entire media.  If the Iranians conducted a successful test of a nuclear device, that same group would figure out a way to blame it on President Bush; or, a plot by Mossad, an alien invasion or an act of God.  In other words, in the current political climate in this country, there is no such thing as "unquestioned proof".   I wish that the short answer to question #2 could be the same as the answer to question #1.  I am not that naive.  Nor am I naive enough to believe that my answer to question #1 would ever be adopted.  

Our only hope is that the Israelis have better intelligence than we do; and, once they have what qualifies as "unquestioned proof" in Israel that the Iranians are getting close, they will take appropriate action.  It shouldn't be this way, we should be able to unite behind our government and do the right thing.  I am really not that naive!

Don Newell

I am tempted to give the same advice we were given on
nuclear weapons during the 1950s and 60s.

1. Bend over. 2. Put your head between your legs. 3
Kiss your butt goodbye.

Given that Iran has been the greatest state sponsor of
terrorism since 1979, and given that they did this
without being a nuclear power, the question does pose
itself, “What the hell were we doing before they got
the bomb!!!???” They felt invulnerable before then
(and obviously they were), what makes anybody think
they are going to be LESS of a problem after they get
the bomb?

Unfortunately it appears that we are going to have to
lose a city or two before we get serious.

I went through downtown Los Angeles the other day and
marveled at all the 80 to 100 story buildings in a 4
by 8 block area. I don’t have to worry because I live
and work a long way away. But what about all those
fools who do? You’d think that they would be a little
worried (along with those in Manhattan and DC) but
they aren’t because they are all LIBERALS. They aren't
because they KNOW that the greatest danger America
faces is the BushHitler.

Bill Palmer

What should the American response be if Iran announces it has the atomic bomb, or if we have unquestioned proof that it does?

By the time the announcement is made or positive proof an atomic bomb exists, it will be too late won't it?   The response will depend upon the person occupying the White House at the time.  If as expected, Democrats win an even larger majority in congress and we have a Democrat in the White House, maybe a phone call expressing congratulations will be in order since the poor Iranians had to do something to protect themselves against a bunch of warmongering Republicans and neo-cons.  After all, the Iranians are not guilty of any deceit or support of terrorists anywhere in the world.  How could they be engaged in nefarious deeds if Bush accused them of doing so?  We must remember that Bush always lies and Democrats and liberals always tell the truth.
If John McCain is in the White House, read the above - it won't make much difference will it?  McCain is distancing himself from Bush more and more each day.  Soon, he will deny he ever knew him.  Familiar story?  
The conclusion is inevitable and eventually Iran will have a nuclear bomb.  Short of bombing Tehran off the face of the earth, further isolation will be futile since there are too many other countries willing to take up the slack of providing goods and services.  Think Cuba.  Think Iraq under Saddam.  Better yet, think appeasement.

W.B. Rogers
Timmonsville, SC

Such announcement by the Iranian regime, or the possession of solid evidence, is tantamount to an act of war.   The American response should be:

1. Announcement that the Iranian regime is will be replaced.
2. Announcement that any use of said weapons will result in the immediate and overwhelming nuclear response.   In other words, the weather forecast for Tehran would be ten thousand degrees and mushroom cloudy.
3. All covert assistance to opposition groups with Iran with the goal of overthrow of the mullahs, include special ops teams.
4. Implement a blockade of Iran -using all military assets to starve the regime of economic resources.
5. Surgical air strikes on all military assets of the regime and leadership.
6. Agreement to recognize a new Iranian government that is representative of the people on condition of full access to all records and locations of the Mullah's nuclear program.
   

Of course, we would not hear the end of the complaints from the "world community" publicly.  But, we will have their gratitude in private.

 
Mitchell Day

Charlotte, NC

The answer is obvious: Send Obama there
immediately to talk them out of using it and
to bring immediate world peace. Guaranteed
results and no preparation required.

Actually, the answer to all problems is the
same: send Obama. Only he has the answer
to all problems; he knows this stuff. He has
repeatedly demonstrated his flawless judgment.  

(name withheld)

What should the American response be if Iran announces it has the atomic
bomb, or if we have unquestioned proof that it does?

My Answer: I have a 4-stage plan:

1. Watch Israel
2. Lock and Load
3. Wait till the world comes begging.
4. Extract all the protection money we can. (Might as well show the world a
real shakedown instead of the pretend one they complain about now).
All fixed.

Michael Smith

Seattle

The Manhattan Project, starting virtually from scratch and with limited funds, managed to build working nuclear devices within a few years.  The mullahs have had 30 years since the peanut brain and his (and now Obama's) national security advisor handed them the keys to the palace.  Not to mention virtually unlimited funding, the gullibility, appeasement, complicity and willfull blindness of the West and the teachings of A.Y. Khan, among other nuclear scientists we trained.    

There is, to my mind, little doubt that the Iranians already posses functional nuclear weapons, despite the publicized fol-de-rol about centrifuges and the like.  I believe that the questions they are mulling now mainly involve when and how best to deploy them.  I'd be amazed if we, and certainly the Israelis, do not already know this and are not seriously polishing up the various scenarios.

The lead decisions here will most likely be made by the Israelis. Obviously, alternatives to war would be desirable, but they seem ephemeral.   Despite the galactic ineptitude of the Olmert regime, the Israelis won't sit back and take a first strike, no matter what kind of pressure is applied by us, or the Europeans, or the Russians, or anyone else.  When they feel sufficiently threatened, they will attack.  Our decisions will involve mainly the magnitude of assistance we provide.  One only hopes that if we must go to kill the king, that we kill the king.

Regards,
Jack Lipkins

Iran's announcement that it has the bomb should not be taken lightly, but before any military action is taken, we must verify the veracity of the claim. Of course this means relying on the CIA and other intelligence agencies that have poor performance records on middle east activities. If it does in fact the bomb, then we should coordinate immediate military action, including nuclear weapons, with the Israelis, if they haven't already done so. I am certain that strike plans have already be formulated, but it takes a president with the fortitude to carryout those plans.
 
Israel is the only country we can count on to back us in any definitive action since they will be the first to be targeted by Iran. And we should make it clear to all the other Arab countries that allowing Iran the capability to destroy Israel also means and can do the same to them. What is so scary is that the Democrats have not any idea what the danger is not only to the Middle East and the oil supply, but also to the US and Europe.
 
Tom Bullock
West Covina, CA   

"What should the American response be if Iran announces it has the atomic
bomb, or if we have unquestioned proof that it does?"

That is the easiest "current question" ever. America would do nothing, just
as America did nothing when North Korea had the bomb and it had done
nothing with the various incremental steps of the Iranian buildup.

It is not a guess, just a certainty. When the news occurs, we will hear a
lot about how this bomb is actually primitive, how Iran actually has no
evil aim toward America, just some border disputes with neighboring countries.
Iran is the bully and America is, seemingly happily, being coaxed into
exiting the region.

It would take much much more for a reevaluation of the situation by the
people in Washington. Currently everybody is readjusting to the new
situation of American hesitancy, with Iraq saying that they will not help
America, Saudi Arabia considering the atomic bomb for itself and Israel
considering all military possibilities.

Mathieu Dutour Sikiric
Zagreb Croatia

"What should the American response be if Iran announces it has the
atomic bomb, or if we have unquestioned proof that it does?"

Close the Strait of Hormuz.

Obviously, the only way we could be sure that they truly have
achieved what they want us to believe is their goal would be to wait
until the missile had been fired and exploded. It is unlikely that
they would do as North Korea did: fire a demonstration shot into
some remote ocean site. They really want to start killing Jews, not
just sit there in our crosshairs.

So what we must do must be done BEFORE we learn, not after we learn.
It is the drawing of the line on the sand.

It should be in the form on a clear, unequivocal statement: We shall
not wait until you have demonstrated that you have produced a bomb
capable of nuclear destruction. At the moment our surveilance assures
us that you are close to achieving your declared goal, we shall,
without notification, destroy your capability to launch it.

Stuart Williamson