I dunno, maybe I'm an idiot - but I keep hearing 'experts' talk about how to go about making a deal with Iran on its nuke ambitions, and to me this is absurd talk - Iran will only be amenable to a deal if they see a way forward for themselves given their proclivities that does not necessarily involve nuking up - but if on the other hand they feel it is essential given what they want and expect to nuke up then the only way to stop that from happening is to force it - it's that simple. All these people talking about 'avenues towards a settlement' are talking gibberish unless they can demonstrate evidence of Iran being open to a future that is not necessarily nuked up - I don't see any evidence of such out there and so to me the choice is clear: force Iran to give up its ambitions, or accept the inevitable of a nuked up Persia. And as I've said before, I believe Obama a long time ago accepted [out of cowardice or a pronounced antipathy towards American power] the latter and everything now 'negotiation wise' is just bull shit window dressing.
