Will the US ever open bilateral negotiations with Iran?
480674
Iran is an odd case.  Up to about three years ago relations between the US and Iran were thawing.  Although both nations were making loud public statements denouncing the other there were several agreements reached (for example when Iran promised to allow any US military aricraft in distress the right to land at an iranian airfield).\n\nIf Iran were not stupidly getting the entire world upset at them with their nuclear projects - I would expect that the US and Iran would be discussing re-opening diplomatic relations.\n\nThe problem Iran has is that the people running the country are not popular and need something to distract the Iranian people's attention away from thier internal policy failures and poor economic performance.  \n\nIMO what we need to do is just wait them out.
482251
The US doesn't WANT to bomb Iran, however, the US also does not want Iran to develop nuclear weapons.  If other efforts to get Iran to stop their nuclear development program fails, the US will feel it has no choice but to destroy the Iranian nuclear program by force.\n\nHope that isn't too long-winded for you.
323385
Yes. \n\n  The Iranians have expressed, financed and conspired in hostile acts against use for 25 years.\n\n  When they get a nuke, they will use it on us.  \n\n  Only the stupidest people would allow a sworn enemy to openly build better weapons unmolested.\n\n  Incidently, the same is applicable to North Korea.
786455
Well Iran has been wanting to talk with the US for a while now.  When the Pres of Iran wrote his letter to Bush he said that he would love to talk to the US to discuss options.  Yet we just blew him off and talked about military options.  We make Iran to be this big bad guy but if we were to just listen to what they really say instead of listen to what just the media and our own govt tell us...we'd understand it better.
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.
1159578
I think Iran will shamelessly gouge the West for all the money and concessions it can get.  But in the end, Iran will probably accept the offer.  They have nothing to lose.  They can always resume their research in the future.\n\nIran may say developing nuclear capability is a part of national pride and political independence, but from our perspective, it is just blackmail.  \n\nI sincerely believe that most international relations are based on faulty images of the other side.  Iran should know the West cannot accept weapons of devastating destruction in the hands of a volatile religious theocracy.  However, Iran probably doesn't see itself that way.\n\nOn the flip side, the West probably doesn't appreciate the level of national pride they pin on achieving nuclear power.  For Iran, it is a matter of national honor and a symbol that they are a world power.\n\nHowever, someone has to level with Iran:  they are not a stable enough country to handle nukes.
333463
Why is it the the U.S. can have nuclear weapons and Iran can't?
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.
215505
India's deal?  Then yes.  This is from an answer I gave on a similar question:\n\nBy formally separating the military and civilian nuclear reasearch, India has giving the US, the UN, and the IAEA room to employ the Diplomatic portion of national power.\n\nNational power is dirived from the DIME principle (Diplomatic, Informational, Military, Economic). \n\nIn agreeing to separate the nuclear systems, India gave negotiation room to the US and the world, which may lead to regional disarmarment. The goal is to get Pakistan to agree to the same deal. By doing so, it allows the hostile countries to get away from an "all or nothing" position in nuclear negotiations. There are also economic benefits in this for both as they can avoid sanctions.\n\nIf this all works out (Diplomacy is the hardest to predict of the aspects of national power), then it could lead to an increase in regional stability and closer ties between India, Paskistan, and the world.\n\nThis also allows for more diplomacy than is possible with the Iranian situation. If Iran continues to isolate itself diplomatically and economically, other nations will have few options outside military force in dealing with Iran. Of course, seeing that they can maintain a civilian nuclear power system through diplomacy may make some of the cooler heads in Iran come around to negotiating.\n\nWith the dicators Iran has now, that, in my opinion, is doubtfull...
354538
If the USA or the UN do not get Iran under control--YES.
488035
I would also have to agree.\nAlso it is presumbly part of a ploy in order to get Iran to operate in a way that is more acceptable to the West.
106532
One thing's for sure, US won't go for another war, it already has too many on its hands.\nAfter being referred to UN Security Council, pressure will be placed on Iran. \nWith no country coming to its rescue at this point, let's see whether Iran buckles under the pressure or not.\nMost probably, it won't. Because developing a nuclear capability is more of a pride for each nation, even if its only a deterrant.\nBut, only time will tell!
161945
Sometimes the entire Iran situation looks like Iraq, the current Iranian president 9being an independent candidate) seems like a perfect target to be the next Saddam Hussein. \n\nPolitically, the US is pressurizing the opposition to join them, as it is the governing regime will definitely go weak and then like in any other progressing economy they will have their foot in the door to make sure that there is a well paved road for them to commute whenever they want.\n\nI think only time will tell what exactly is the major game plan here, but one thing is sure it is not going to be a smooth ride and eventually the US will gain something substantial.
670545
America’s Options Against Iran. Iran’s nuclear program is a matter of concern. The real question, of course, is “what can the United States do about it?”\n\nThe options are negotiate, launch aerial attacks to take out the nuclear program, or to enact regime change through one means or another. Negotiation is not exactly an option – Iran has pretty much ruled out any deal that would limit its nuclear weapons program. There is also the fact that the Israelis will not patiently sit by while the Iranians use negotiations to buy time to continue their nuclear weapons development. These two factors leave only the option of stopping the program through air attacks or regime change.\n\nAir attacks have huge problems. Iran has a widely-dispersed nuclear program. There are at least 23 cities (plus uranium mines) in this program. However, targeting does not just involve the nuclear program. Iran also has a huge missile program. There are 40 cities or islands involved with Iran’s missile program, which also would need to be hit – so as to limit or preferably eliminate delivery options for the Iranians. This means at least 63 sites have to be hit in order to guarantee a major disruption to the Iranian nuclear program and its delivery system.\n\nThe type of air attack involved would probably be on the order of the first day of the 1991 Gulf War, in which a devastating air attack was launched over a month’s time. Even that devastating attack was not enough to prevent Saddam Hussein from launching missiles against Israel and Saudi Arabia in the 1991 Gulf War. In 2003, special operations forces were able to prevent a large number of launches, but their use is a huge step forward. Iran has some modern planes (particularly the MiG-29 Fulcrum), but the majority of their aircraft are old F-14As, F-4 Phantoms, J-7 Fishbeds, and F-5E Tigers. An air campaign would be able to hit the sites, and degrade the program. Iranian response would unpredictable, though.\n\nThe best option to guarantee a halt to Iran’s nuclear weapons program is to overthrow the imams. There are two ways this can be done; sponsoring the domestic opposition (which has significant popular support), or through an invasion. The former option has worked in the past. In the 1980s, the CIA was able to keep the Polish Solidarity movement functioning as an opposition movement despite martial law and opposition by the Polish and Russian secret police. That said, the effort took eight years, and the CIA back then was run by William Casey. Today’s CIA has become more of a bureaucracy, and much more risk-averse. The other problem with such an effort is that the situation in Iran is markedly different in two respects: Poland did not have a lengthy history of sponsoring terrorist attacks, nor was that country trying to develop nuclear weapons.\n\nThe other option is an invasion. This is probably the touchiest option. Currently, Iraq involves 17 American  brigades and three division headquarters. Afghanistan involves another division headquarters and three brigades. The 2nd Infantry Division is pretty much committed to defending the Republic of Korea. Two more divisions are carrying out peacekeeping in various parts of the world (the Sinai, Kosovo, and Bosnia being major deployments on that front). This is seven out of 24 divisions available (12 active, 8 National Guard, 3 active Marine, one reserve Marine). The Army is arguably stretched thin, since some divisions will have returned from Iraq or Afghanistan. Until the situation in Iraq stabilizes or additional divisions are formed up, that will remain the case. Iraq has become an insurgency, and those take time (usually five to ten years). Iran would, in all likelihood, develop a similar insurgency. That will further tie down American forces in the region.\n\nThe options against Iran are limited, in large part due to the “peace dividend” of the 1990s, in which eight active-duty and four National Guard divisions were dis
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.
1095327
I think we shouldn't give up diplomatic efforts until a) it is clear  that diplomatic efforts won't work or b) we are convinced that Iran is just using the delay to press full speed ahead towards a weapons program.\n\nHowever, from what I hear from the EU as well as the US, b) isn't far away, unfortunately.
649307
Niether USA nor Iran want to go to war with the other.  Their respective leaders merely want to make them sound tough to their resppective people.