If diplomacy fails with Iran, would you support and attack on their nuclear facilities or not?
403386
I think Iranian government(which is separate from its people) is developing Nuke Weapons (in their own words) to promote Islam in other countries. This is one of their goals. I think U.S and other countries must be aware that this regime doesn't care about it's own people, and so they don't care about anyone in the world. \nIran is one of the richest oil nations, but look how their citizens are living!!!! all the money form oil exports are in their own bank accounts in foreign countries.\nDo you know how many political prisoners are in prisons in Iran!!! They kill, torture and do lots of stuff that you can't imagine. \nI think the first thing U.S and other countries can do is to freeze their assets and money in banks.  some of them(people in Iran Regime) has Green card and travel to U.S. if Bush means what he says how they can travel to his country so easily.\nIranian people has nothing to do with all this. Why they should pay the price. All these things you see in T.V that some people are supporting them, these are their own people and they are paid to be there. \nBut in my opinion they should try to resolve the problem in a way that Iranian people pay the least price.
1113941
I would continue the nuclear program.As long as it's OK for other countries to have nuclear energy(cos i don't think they are building weapons of mass destruction) it's OK for Iran to have it too
409665
A worst case scenario would unroll if the US were to launch a major air strike against Iranian nuclear facilities in the next few months.  A limited air strike against a "choke point", such as the Iranian uranium conversion facility at Isfahan, would like disrupt Iran's nuclear program for a long time.  The problem is what happens then?\n\nIran will respon in some way, all of which are devastatint to regional and international security.  They could lob scuds at Israel and US bases in the region.\n\nThe could block the Strait of Hormuz, cutting off the oil pipeline.\n\nThey could stop selling oil.\n\nThey could use their connections with Hezbullah to launch terrorist strikes against US interest.\n\nThey could do all or any of the above in combination. The only feasible targeting of a US nuclear attack would be the hardened facility at Natanz, under 75 ft of hard rock.  The other nuclear facilities are soft targets and can be taken out by conventional weapons.\n\nWhatever course the US takes, be prepared for the UNIMAGINABLE>
429640
The whole MAD business.  If both sides start using nuclear weapons, the world has a good chance of ending.  So, no one actually uses them.  I'm guessing if Iran actually uses them, the US won't retaliate because no one wants to use nuclear weapons.
390549
The UN will probably not vote for an attack on Iran.  Russia is making money off of Iran, and Russia is broke so they need the money.  So, Russia is on the Security Council of the UN and has veto power.  We'll talk to them, impose some sanctions that Russia and others will skirt around, threaten them, etc.  I think that we'll bomb certain facilities if we think they're getting close.  One good thing is that France is totally against Iran having nukes.  That makes a coalition easier to form, since the French can be active whiners.\n\nHowever, Russia may get with the program if we can show proof Iran is close.  The superpowers know that it would be a BAD thing for little countries to get The Bomb.\n\nBTW, the reason Iran has such a creep for president is because the moderates boycotted the last election in protest of a failure to achieve more democratic change.  They'll probably vote next time, so they'll get a cooler president.
468328
No they shouldn't.\n\nIf they can't be fair to IRAN about nuclear technology, than that makes them hypocrites.
373677
Iran will nuke Israel if given the chance.  They are that stupid.  We have to stop them but the answer is not to nuke Iran but to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons.  I say air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.  This is of course, after diplomacy fails.
148428
This is a country that has been openly preaching hate and advocating obliteration of its enemies for nearly thirty years. I HOPE the U.S. attacks Iran rather than allowing it to become a nuclear power. I'm afraid that if it does, it will have to carry the burden by itself, because the rest of the world has shown itself unenthusiastic for unrewarding but necessary hardships.
546383
The possesion of nuclear weapons in the hands of any state whether civilized or not makes the world very unsafe.The scenario of having a world power that believes in improving it own nuclear arsenal but shout at those who claim to want it for peacefull purpose is rather ridiculous.Iran possessing Nuclear is has wrong has the US,Russia,China,Pakistan,India,Britain,France etc refusing to disarm their Nukes.Disarmament should be acrossthe board,if not we are creating Nuclear apartheid world
281181
While it is not preferable to believe that Nuclear Weapons will ever be used again it is not a practical stand to take.  I believe that some country that really has no idea what the actual outcome of using these weapons will mean to all the people of the world.  I believe that it will be done by a renegade country such as Iran or North Korea, however North Korea seems to get what they want by having these weapons without using them.  Iran should they develop them would be a good choice to use them as hey have stated that is they're intention.  Should an attack come from any country it is almost a certainty that they will be attacked with the same type of weapons.  These actions could change the entire balance of nature and speed up our declining ecology.
1011885
I hope not. luckily  i don't think bush has enough support to have a nuclear war now.
309545
WE won't attack Iran,we might bomb your enrichment facilities.Iran is maneuvering its self into a position that most of the world will not allow.Yes you have oil,But larger more powerful countries who could take it have instead either not bought from you or have bought from you.\nBut the world is hungry for that oil,can Iran really afford to go around slapping faces of larger nations?
532696
It should not be allowed nuclear capabilities, and we should all endever to prevent this occurance, because it is not within the intrests of the Western world. I recognise the arguement that Iran is as unstable or backward as the Western press portray it to be, however a neuclear Iranian would enable it to dictate policy in the region to a much larger degree, look at North Korea for example. The West needs a weaker Iran to exploit its natural resources, we should not be apologetic about this fact, we should however be careful how we go about it. As previous events have shown, badly planned interferance is far worse than isolationism.
675970
I hope not.. it would be a big mistake if they attacked Iran
177248
Iran should be able to have nuclear energy. If the US is giving it to others then it should go both ways. There should be no room for hypocrisy.
612648
Again, there's no point in even addressing what political issues you're implying, because it's a fact that Iran can not and will not set off a nuke here.  That would be considered an act of nuclear war, and we would retaliate with an unbelievable amount of nuclear firepower, which would squash Iran like a tiny bug under a giant boot.  You don't really want to enrage 300 million patriots backed by a trillion-dollar, apocalypse-bringing nuclear arsenal do you?
319054
I sure hope not because a nuclear war isn't exactly my idea of a great time.  Iran has nukes of its own and will not hesitate to use them back.  If we get into a nuclear war, I suggest all you people who live in major cities move out to the country and become farmers or something because you know the major cities will be the first to be hit!  I'm in rural Oklahoma so I'm probably ok, unless Iran suddenly decides that it hates cows and farms.