May 27th, 2008
05:01 PM ET

What to do about Iran’s nuclear program?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visits the Natanz uranium enrichment facilities in April. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Iran is withholding critical information needed to prove whether it's trying to make nuclear weapons, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The U-N's nuclear monitor is out with a pretty harsh report, suggesting Iran has stonewalled them. The report says Iran has ventured into explosives, uranium processing and a missile warhead design – all activities that could go hand-in-hand with building nuclear weapons.

Iran continues to insist its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, namely for energy. It dismissed the documents put out by the U-N as "forged”, although it refused to provide any paperwork to back its claims. One Iranian official says the country will continue to cooperate with the agency.

But the report suggests there hasn't been all that much cooperation going on. One senior official close to the IAEA told The New York Times that there are some parts of Iran's nuclear program where the military seems to have played a role. The report also alleges that Iran is learning to make more powerful centrifuges. The nuclear watchdog agency says that in April, it was denied access to sites were Iranians were making centrifuge components and researching uranium enrichment.

U.S. intelligence says that Iran stopped working on nuclear weapons in 2003, but not everyone believes that is the case.

Here’s my question to you: What should be done about Iran's nuclear program?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Lori from Michigan writes:
We should do nothing at this point. God forbid if Bush tries to act against Iran before his term expires. His administration blew it in Iraq by not having an exit strategy. If Obama is elected in November, then maybe he can accomplish a peaceful solution. If McCain is elected, he will go to war and it will last 200 years.

Cosmin from East Providence, Rhode Island writes:
I think that Iran should be allowed to build a U.N.-supervised nuclear power plant (completely controlled by the U.N.). This way, Iran gets the nuclear energy it's allegedly looking for, while the U.S. can be happy that the Iranian nuclear program is safely positioned under their watchful eye.

Stanley writes:
It's simple, Israel should agree to dismantle its nuclear arsenal, and then we should insist that Iran stops its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Jacob from Michigan writes:
Jack, We should do as McCain says and "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran".

Jane writes:
The U.S. and the U.N. should take seriously Iran's claim that the documents they are worried about were forged. We should all remember, and Jack, you should remind people, that there were forged documents in the lead-up to the Iraq invasion. Everyone should slow down and remember that we were lied into the disastrous invasion of Iraq and we are probably being lied into another disastrous invasion.

Doug from Knoxville, Arkansas writes:
How about we let Europe or China or some other country take care of the problems in their corner of the world? As a taxpayer, I am tired of my taxes being spent in every corner of the world when it needs to be spent here!

Posted by
Filed under: Iran
soundoff (152 Responses)
  1. Darlene - Philadelphia

    Well we've tried the invade and bomb them strategy and that didn't quite work out. It costs us thousands of our soldiers lives and our country is broke. Here's a thought, let's try Obama's policy of talking to them. From talks we can determine the best course of action or no action.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:10 pm |
  2. Brian from Fort Mill, S.C.

    The first thing we need to do is to end the Iraq war. We're running out of soldiers.

    Once that war is winding down, it frees up some soldiers in case we have to start a war with Iran.

    If Bush had any brains, he would have left Sadaam Hussein and went after Iran first. Then, Iraq would have been our ally instead of enemy.

    If you remember, Iraq WAS our ally during the Iraq/Iran war. We could have used this to our advantage, but NOOOOOOOOO, Bush had to mess everything up. Now we have nobody to help us in the region.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:16 pm |
  3. frank in phoenix

    The best thing to do would be to undo the war in Iraq, and keep Sadaam as Iran's arch enemy, so that they remain weak and off balance. Outside of that, getting oil back to $25 a barrel would be the next best thing.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:17 pm |
  4. Ed Reed

    There's no rush. We can afford to wait until we have a new administration with some credibility. I don't believe a single thing the current administration says.

    Ed Reed
    Port Aransas, TX

    May 27, 2008 at 2:19 pm |
  5. Mike, Syracuse NY

    McCain said he wants to reduce our nuclear arsenal. I agree. Let's start with a reduction of one warhead.....target Tehran.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:20 pm |
  6. Anthony Smith

    Eat or get eaten! Finish them now while we are graciously handing out checks and trillions. Alittle GOP twostep for ya...

    Wildwood Crest, NJ

    May 27, 2008 at 2:21 pm |
  7. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    Let the IAEA and the International organizations handle the things they are suppose too. Don't allow the same mistake to be made here that was allowed in Iraq.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:23 pm |
  8. Douglas -- Rochester, MN

    Give Israel the OK to "take care of it."

    May 27, 2008 at 2:23 pm |
  9. Jamaal Kansas

    First Jack they are not our Problem we are not the Police for the World I think that is what the United Nations job is so Jack the United Nations should handle that Problem because they Know that America will try to handle so they won't I say we don't do anything until other Countries in the Region does something because they are the ones that are in the Biggest danger.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:24 pm |
  10. Iris in Saugatuck, Michigan

    Dear Jack,

    What is this "Nuclear" you refer to?


    May 27, 2008 at 2:24 pm |
  11. Tom in Desoto Texas

    There is little that can be done. There has been talk about invading but that would need to be analized. Iran is about 50% larger than Iraq in land mass and it has about three times the population as Iraq does and in the Bush administration (McCain too) believe the forces in Iraq could invade Iran. The math doesn't work for a victorious outcome...for the U.S.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:27 pm |
  12. Rex in Portland, Ore.

    What to do next? This whole subject of nuclear armaments and nuclear energy production is so wrapped in secrecy and propaganda that we the people do not have a clue. i personally get the feeling that all of this hullabaloo over the nuclear situation in Iran is covering some deeper, darker reason for provoking confrontation with Iran. I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe McCain's stance that the USA is not talking with Iran. My own thought is that – having failed to procure a dependable, secure of oil from Iraq, and having the source of oil in Arabia 'hanging on by its teeth', so to speak – the USA needs to insure that Iran does not start dumping oil for euros at some horrendous low rate and posting a devastating threat to the US dollar.

    Iran with nukes? The AEC inspectors seem to think that it is a long time away, if viable at all. Bush and that gang of world controlling neocons in the World Bank and the IMF are much less concerned about nukes in Iran than they are about continuing in power and control. This massive disinformation campaign about the Middle East and this absolute refusal to even discuss the truth with the people is distressing. This administration (and many previous ones) has the attitude that the people do not count at all. Unfortunately that is becoming the truth. Fear mongering has reached a new level. The power of congress has reached a new low.

    "The monster is coming", as Stephen King says. And this monster is none other than loss of world control by the neocons and the oil-based power brokers. And worrying about nukes in Iran is fast becoming a futile gesture on the part of a weakening state.

    Jack, find me someone who cares.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:28 pm |
  13. Tina (Ft Worth)

    If we are going to do away with the so called terrorists nuclear weapons why not start here at home then to Israel and then move onto Iran, North Korea and all the other countries Bush has said they are producing Nuclear warheads.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:29 pm |
  14. Jenny


    Iran is not really our problem. The could not hit us if they tried. Their target has been and always will be Israel. If they hit Israel, then everybody will go after Iran. I seriously doubt that they want that. I think that the terrorist that the area trains and produces are a bigger threat than a few nuclear war heads. They know in a conventional war they would be toast.

    Jenny Rome ga

    May 27, 2008 at 2:29 pm |
  15. Peter Pan Fairview, Texas

    There are a couple of options. The first is to do exactly what we are doing about it and that is nothing.

    The second is to let Russia help them develop a peaceful nuclear power program and let Russia monitor it.

    The third is to turn Iran into glass with a nuclear bomb. That ends the program once and for all. Of course it kills a lot of people but we have done that before in Japan. Look what good friends we are now!!

    There comes a time when talking does no good. Especially when it falls on deaf ears. If Iran truly wants a peaceful nuclear program they will let Russia their neighbor assist them. What are friends for right?

    May 27, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
  16. Cash, Alabama

    President Bush should authorize the military to attack and take out the treat before he leaves office. I would say around October of this year would be a good target date !!

    May 27, 2008 at 2:33 pm |
  17. Ron Mechanicsville VA

    Bomb The Nuclear sites. We have the Most technologically advanced Air Force in the World. From Iraq, it's not far and Russia can't warn them if it is stealth! Israel, can't be the only country with Balls! it's time for us to do a right thing instead of a wrong thing! Iran was always the threat!

    May 27, 2008 at 2:34 pm |
  18. Mike S., New Orleans, Louisiana

    The international community and the countries immediately threatened by a nuclear Iran will decide what to do about Iran.

    It is time for the United States to stop being the international bully.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:34 pm |
  19. Conservative Buyer -CA

    Obama should talk with the Chinese, Russians, perhaps NATO, and even get the Saudis involved, along with invitations of Iranian diplomats.

    Get all of these participants and establish a fine line of what not to do with nuclear energy. Have the Iranians sign an accordance of peace and non aggression. Give an incentive to the Iranians to convert energy resources for all their needs.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:35 pm |
  20. Terry in Hanover County

    Cooler heads need to prevail. We are on the precipice of World War III. Our intel going into Iraq was not merely flawed but wrong. Why should we trust the intel about Iran? We need to work with other nations to determine the facts of the situation instead of attacking first and asking questions later. This can be done without threatening the security of Israel or ourselves. But to continue to do things the bass-ackwards way of George W. Bush will only lead to more disaster and more lives lost.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:36 pm |
  21. Harry

    How about doing nothing for the next 8 months We certainly don't need Bush 2 or "3" "negotiating" wirh Iran. Bush goes on a trip to celebrate Israel's birthday and to request the Saudi's for some more oil. For his efforts he was given a bicycle and told to stop whining. This from our friends. I just hope that Bush doesn't play decider in the next 8 months


    May 27, 2008 at 2:38 pm |
  22. Raj, Toronto

    What nuclear program? Have you read the N.I.E. on Iran. Have you read the stories that the weapons we blame are from Iran are not? Have they been aggressive towards America?

    We don't even want them to have peaceful nuclear technology which goes against the treaties we have signed. According to Bush we don't even want them to have the knowledge of how to develop it, this stuff was made up in the 40's. Jack, stop learning and just be ignorant and you will fit right in this Orwellian world.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  23. John in San Diego

    According to McCain-Bush we should just nuke it – unleash a nuclear display of shock-and-awe that will scare the rest of the world into abandoning any nuclear aspirations. Makes sense to me – NOT!

    May 27, 2008 at 2:40 pm |
  24. Jan from Ohio

    One of 2 things, Jack:

    1) Elect MCCAIN in Nov. & within 1 year, NO ONE will be around to worry about Iran having nuclear weapons; or

    2) Elect OBAMA in Nov. and we can talk with & negotiate them into peace throughout the Middle East and enjoy LIVING out our natural lives here, in the Good ole US of A!

    Almost sounds like a no-brainer to me!

    Obama + Change 4 PEACE & prosperity – '08/12

    May 27, 2008 at 2:41 pm |
  25. Brian from Fort Mill, S.C.

    We could have a sing-along with John McCain:

    "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran!"

    Can we get the Beach Boys to come out of retirement, and send John McCain INTO retirement??? 🙂

    May 27, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  26. Brian from Fort Mill, S.C.

    "Iris in Saugatuck, Michigan May 27th, 2008 2:24 pm ET
    Dear Jack,
    What is this “Nuclear” you refer to?

    It's not "NUCLEAR" – It's NU-Q-LAR!" 🙂

    May 27, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  27. Lori in MI

    We should do nothing at this point. God forbid if Bush tries to act against Iran before his term expires. His administration blew it in Iraq not having an exit strategy. If Obama is elected in November then maybe he can accomplish a peaceful solution. If McCain is elected he will go to war and it will last 200 years.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  28. douglas gengler

    how about we let europe or china or some other country take care of the problems in their corner of the world. as a taxpayer I am tired of my taxes being spent in every corner of the world when it needs to be spent here!! doug in knoxville arkansas

    May 27, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  29. James in Cape Coral, FL

    Maybe we should try leaving them alone for a change. If we spent half the time and money worrying about our own people as we do the rest of the world we might find a flourishing economy here at home and an entire world full of countries who don't hate us. Is this really where experience get's us? Arguing about the same things time and again and never getting anywhere. Oh Please, Please let us elect a President with experience in the kind of politics that have gotten us in this hole.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  30. Jed in Redding, CA

    Iran is just the junior high bully of the Middle East. They might call Israel names and wish they were dead but they don't have the brute force to back it up. And as far as nuclear strengh goes - C'mon??? What petty third-world dictatorship DOESN'T want it's own nuclear arsenal?? I'm not to keen to go to war with the mouse that roared. We can talk military options if and when they get a nuclear weapon. (and trust me, they won't keep it a secret. If there's anything Dr. Strangelove taught us, it's that the real power of a nuclear warhead is as a bargaining chip, not as a weapon)

    May 27, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  31. David,San Bernardino,CA.

    Why is it OK for for a country led by an idiot (bush) to have a nuclear program and not OK for Iran to have a nuclear program? Our leader can't even pronounce nuclear.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  32. Bill in New London, CT

    I've never understood where we get the authority to have nukes but then say other countries can't. Obviously, we don't want any country shooting atomic bombs at us or our allies, but isn't that the idea of WMD - mutually assured distruction? Do you really think Iran is going to shoot a nuclear weapon at us or our allies knowing full well that would give Isreal and America a reason to blast them off the face of the earth? Hillary's ready to obliterate them! I think if we want to stop other countries from starting a nuclear weapons program, we have to completely disarm ourselves. Fat chance on that happening.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:52 pm |
  33. mitch martin arkansaw

    with bush in office,we can't do anything.diplomacy with him would be laughable.the entire world would rise up against us ,if bush attacked them.perhaps a future president with good intentions, can bring direct dialogue with iran,thereby giving us time and leverage ,to rebuild our prestige ,in the eyes of our allies.russia must be engaged,to quit supplying them with aid in their effort.perhaps a missile defense trade off for stopping their efforts.only then will we have tried enough,so that other nations would respect and support a limited engagement,if necessary, to ensure iran does not complete their task.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  34. Y in Georgia

    Trying to stop terror is like trying to stop a huge current like Niagara Falls. It cannot be stopped. No matter how high the wall, it will find a way over it. We cannot kill evil, but we can guard against evil. We can create boundaries preventing evil from coming near our allies and us by negotiating where they can and cannot reside and who they can and cannot go near. But ultimately we need to ask for God's help and protection.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  35. Dan, Chantilly Va

    Tell the UN to take care of it. They won't have any better luck than us, but at least we can save some money. Then, when it all hits the fan, it becomes the UN's fault instead of ours. Although I doubt it will ever hit the fan. Ahmadinejad is all talk.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  36. Deb from Lancaster, PA

    Right now, there's not much we can do. We're out of troops, out of cash, oil-needy, and devoid of diplomatic prestige and influence.
    The time has come to gather the world community at the U.N., present our case, and ask for cooperation. After all, it benefits the planet, not just us.
    The Cowboy President has done immeasurable damage that will never be repaired unless we start now by instigating intelligent but firm discourse, and get the world on our side against Iran's nuclear aspirations (NOT "nukular" as we have been hearing for 8 years!).
    Obama will do that.
    To turn a phrase, "Grab the world's brains, and their hearts and minds will follow." Grabbing the other part sure hasn't worked.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  37. Louden in Bellevue, WA

    Russia, China even France sell Nuclear ractor techologies to Iran.
    The issue isn't Nuclear weapons. It's the excuse of using Nuclear Reactors for energy.

    Let's get off the fence and drive Fission development which doesn't use radioactive materials or create bombs. We'd remove the excuse and the chain of support of radioactive materials to Iran.

    Maybe if we thought outside the box we could come up with solutions instead of excuses...

    May 27, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  38. AndyZ

    If the decision is made after January of 2009 then it will be a well thought out approach that should end with all parties being in agreement (Think Democrats in the White House.) If either McCain is elected or the decision is made prior to January 2009 the result will be: Bomb, Bomb, Bomb; Bomb, Bomb Iran! (sung to the tune of the Beach Boys, "Barbara Ann.")

    May 27, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  39. Allen L Wenger

    We need to do the same thing we did with Israel, India, and Pakistan. Pretend like they don't have them.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  40. CJ in Roanoke, VA

    We cannot do anything about Iran because if we do, the price of oil will increase dramatically and be the final knockout punch for our economy. Iran and the rest of the world knows this too.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:58 pm |
  41. Dave from Veazie, ME


    I think this country is ready for some real courage from our leaders. Let's sit down and talk to Iran directly. This idea of setting preconditions that must be met before you even try to listen to them obviously isn't working very well. Just because we're talking to them doesn't mean we'll give in to any demands they have, it just means that we're going to talk to them! The last time I checked, saying "No" was still considered talking. If we start the process by saying we're willing to listen we may be able to diffuse the whole situation before there is real danger. Of course we should probably also push to have the whole world begin disarming nuclear weapons, the United States included. It can be hard to demand another country not pursue nuclear weapons when you have a large stock pile of your own.

    May 27, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  42. Beverley, Fredricksburg Va


    Finish Afghanistan – go into Pakistan and get Osama – give Israel whatever it needs to defend itself – and talk to Egypt, Sryia, Lebanon, Jordan, Kuwait, and Saudia Arabia......those countries don't want to see Iran become stronger than they are- I'm sure they have some ideas too!

    May 27, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  43. Rosalynd Florida

    If Iran's nuclear program is for energy as they claim, then the UN can do nothing but monitor their program. Anyway with former President Carter confirming widely held supicions on Israel's nukes arsenal, I am not so sure the world can do anything to stop Iran from at least acquiring the knowledge to build Nukes as a deterrent anyway. I am sure Iran will probably get support from quite a few Arab nations in the region now.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  44. Oracle99 in Boston

    I agree leave these people alone. We have too many problems in the USA that urgently need to be solved. Besides, doesn't Israel have nuclear weapons? And anyone calling for war against them should have to enlist for service there.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  45. Greg ...Cabot AR

    The Iranians are willing to die for their beliefs but they are not willing to sacrifice their entire country....they know that if they start a nuclear war, their first shot will be their last and only shot because we will turn their country into dust....

    They may be crazy but they are not stupid.....how can they continue opress their people if there is no one left alive???

    We would be better off to talk to them like we did with the Soviets during the Cold War....

    May 27, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  46. Chicago Bob from Illinois

    When we finally do something about our dependence on oil, Iran will no longer be relevant. In the short term, we keep them contained and isolated as best we can. Getting out of Iraq will help since then the problems there will spill over into Iran and keep them busy.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  47. Russ in PA

    The administration should shut its trap, McCain should try out for American Idol, and Obama should stick to dancing in Puerto Rico. Elect Ron Paul, and start trade negotiations with Iran. And with every other country, in fact.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  48. Alma (Tennessee)

    I'm sure that our Wild Cowboy President has another spur in his boots that he itching to unload before he leaves office. Whoa Cowboy! Hold tight. Help is on the way and it won't come in the form of quick-draw McCain or Annie Oakley Clinton. It's time for intelligence to replace the shoot- out in the O K corral. It is time for this country to speak softly and carry a BIG stick in settling international problems. GIDDY UP OBAMA!

    May 27, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  49. Terry from North Carolina

    Lets start another war, then we will all be wearing loin cloths and picking through the trash for food. How about we let someone else take care of this issue for a change. How about we take care of our veterans and our poor people living in card board boxes under the train stations. Take the train from Penn Station and look around as you walk through. Lets start worrying about the good old USA.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  50. Adam Mercer Oshawa, Ontario


    Well it is at least possible that someone could green-light that Israeli strike mission that has been planned for years. There would be no Iranian nuclear program after that.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
  51. Colleen- Charlotte, NC

    Didn't I just hear something that said Israel is widely believed to possess a substantial arsenal (an estimated 100 to 200) of nuclear weapons,and maintains intercontinental-range ballistic missiles to deliver them. Israel as a country generally reported as having undeclared chemical warfare capabilities, and an offensive biological warfare program.

    So, why are we most concerned with Iran? Seems rather convenient for the current administration.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  52. Alan, Buxton, Maine

    It would be a big help if we knew what their program was before making any decisions. Having said that, I wonder why we think we have anything to say about it. I don't remember asking Iran for permission to undertake our nuclear program. Why do we think we have the right to dictate what any sovereign nation can do or not do?

    May 27, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  53. Herb in Texas

    We should help them with it. Let's deliver about 2 planeloads of nuclear bombs to Tehran, of course we wouldn't land there.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:06 pm |
  54. John from Chicago

    let them have nuclear power and if the build a bomb and hit israel its their doom also.

    dictator Joseph stalin back in the 50s didnt use nukes because he knew he would be nuked back... i dont think iran will either.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  55. Michael, Toronto, Canada


    Does the US continue its ultra-right hardline conservative policy towards Iran? All this has done has made it more difficult to really get to the truth of any possible nuclear arms development.

    What did the US do with North Korea? Open up a dialogue, establish better relations and get to the truth of their nuclear arms program.

    Remember the old adage, "Be close to your friends, but be closer to your enemies". The US can remain tough, yet still open a better dialogue with Iran and get closer to the reality of what is really going on with its nuclear arms development.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  56. F. Taylor

    Well now the U.S. has proven it will invade smaller nations without any provacation and kill their political leaders and hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens most other nations in the world should try and adopt a Nuclear program for their own self preservation.

    I don't really think this latter statement is appropriate but I can almost guarantee you that many other nations might be thinking that way. Maybe adopting a policy of diplomacy towards other nations rather than a do it or else policy just might be the answer.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  57. Terry, Chandler AZ

    Nothing. Noithing at all. I believe that either no country be permitted to have a nuclear program or any country that has the capabilities be permitted to exercise those nuclear capibilities. To sumerize: nuclear power should be available to all for production of electricity but every nuclear weapon on Plane Earth should be dismantled. Forever!!

    May 27, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  58. Aaron B.; Champaign, IL

    What should or shouldn't we do? We shouldn't tick off their President, that's what we shouldn't do... (though Bush would prefer otherwise).

    I would suggest getting serious with Iran. Republican dogs can laugh all they want at face-to-face meetings with Iranian leaders, but if you don't have closed-door, candid engagements with the guy who has his finger on the Big Red Button, you're simply deluding yourself.

    When Israel is fried beneath a mushroom cloud, will ignorance still be bliss?

    May 27, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  59. obama supporter

    we need to go thru every option there is to resolve this befor even thinking about millatary action. we have enought wars going now. and god forbid, bush and mcsain will want war. i don't know where they think we can get our troops from. we are streched already

    maybe it will hold off till obama is in office and he will have a better chence to nego. then what we have now. bush and mcsain has intimadated the whole world against us.
    looking forward to jan 20 2009

    May 27, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  60. Debbie, Mill Valley, CA

    My understanding is that the main reason other nations want nuclear weapons is because the U.S. does not invade countries with nuclear weapons. Seems like we either need to change the perception that we are invasion happy or start nuking them if we want to change their behavior.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  61. Terri from Virginia

    There are other countries in better positions than the U.S. to deal with Iran. Our foreign policy is in the junkyard now. With the military already pulled to the brink, there really isn't much that U.S. can do unless we make a huge mistake and fulfill McCain's song choice-"Bomb, Bomb, Bomb,-Bomb Bomb Iran".

    May 27, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  62. Chris from NY

    Just as we've done with North Korea give the Iranians an incentive to stop uranium enrichment.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  63. Paul, Columbia, SC

    Realize that all the tin horns will do as they please regardless of what we think or say. Instead of wasting our breath we build the biggest, nastiest, most overwhelming final strike force imaginable and let the world know we have it and will use it if provoked. Dirty Harry had it right: "Go ahead punk; make my day".

    May 27, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  64. Rob, Arvada, CO

    How about just leave Iran alone. Japan, Australia, Italy aren't doing anything about them, why should we? It's time to stop poking our fingers into the hornet's nest.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  65. Allen in Hartwell GA

    When and if Iran gets the bomb and a method to deliver it then we should deal with them the same way we deal with the old Warsaw Pact countries, Russia, and Communist China.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  66. Annie, Atlanta

    We should follow UN guidelines, and not play Nuke Patrol (see War in Iraq as reference). Besides, Israel won't sit idly by, as they didn't with Syria. Wait until another country does to us what we did to Iraq, thinking our WMDs are being controlled by idiots.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  67. June in Florida


    Why is it our responsibility to make the choice of starting a war on Iran. This should be a joint decision between the European countries & the Middle East countries, along with our input. It's on their half of the world & should respond with how worried they are. Enough to start another war?? Then be it. But until then, let's negotiate, negotiate, negotiate!

    May 27, 2008 at 3:16 pm |
  68. Kay in WV


    Until we decide to disarm ourselves and encourage our allies in the region to disarm it is completely hypocritical to assume we have the right to dictate what countries can and cannot have nuclear programs.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  69. Jerry Roselle, Illinois

    Well now that we've taken care of things in Iraq, Iran should be a
    walk in the park.
    Does anyone know what Dr. Strangelove is doing these days?

    May 27, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  70. Adam

    Nothing. If anything they could serve to stabilize the relationship between Iran and the US. When we have the upper hand we have no problem bullying nations into compliance. But when they can back up the tough talk we usually find some sort of compromise – no one wants a nuclear war. Don't start nothing, there won't be nothing.

    Miami, Florida

    May 27, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  71. L.M.,Arizona

    Mind our own business just like Iraq Iran has nothing to do with us and while I am at it Mexico's drug cartels problems have nothing to do with America. We need to stop using so much oil and we need to stop using drugs or legalize them and tax them.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  72. lynn

    there were years of talk and "preparation" of the american psyche building up towards going to war in iraq and now in retrospect, we can see that it was probably planned for a very long time before we went in, and "they were going to go in no matter what " – now its iran - i would like to hear intelligent dialogue about who and what companies profit from the united states being in perpetual war
    lynn – california

    May 27, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  73. Prince Kaywood/New Orleans

    How would you feel Jack if everyone else had nuclear weapons, and you were the only one without them? If president Cater is correct, Israel has nuclear weapons, and so do we. Every nation should get rid of their nuclear weapons, and just let the two waring countries have their presidents just duel it out to the death. But you know Bush wouldn't stand for that, because he could no longer be able to do his tap dance, and brand steer on his large Texas ranch

    May 27, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
  74. Mark, Berwyn, PA

    First, get all of our soldiers out of neighboring Iraq and out of harm's way. Then, offer a little back channel approval to Israel to bomb the living daylights out of every single facility remotely related to nuke production in Iran. Then wait and see what, if any, response the neighboring Arab/Persian/Muslim nations have.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  75. Willow from Sheldon,Iowa

    Let's stop playing the world's policeman. Isn't that what the UN is supposed to be for? Iran is not going to risk alienating Russia, etc. and especially Syria, especially if they miss Israel, to make a point. Because then everybody will be going after Iran. They want to look like the good guys, so all the other Muslim countries will be sympathetic. I say that we wait until hopefully Obama gets in as President. He can begin diplomatic talks with all of the surrounding countries, and approach Iran, and see if talking can help. Once we quit talking, we have a major cold war. We need to talk, if not to Iran, to all of the surrounding countries. If McCain gets into office, all bets are off. He'll want to continue Bush's war by sending it to Iran

    May 27, 2008 at 3:24 pm |
  76. Jane from LA

    I know its an unusual idea, but since threats haven't worked, why not try diplomacy?

    May 27, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  77. Gigi in Alabama

    Since being the neighborhood bully has not worked, why don't we try diplomacy? I know that's a dirty word to George W., but, hey, let's just try it anyway.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  78. Stacy from Farifax, Virginia

    Send Christopher Hill from the State Department to negotiate with Iran like he insisted upon doing with North Korea quite successfully. Then the next President should make him Secretary of State.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:26 pm |
  79. Mike in St. Pete Beach, Florida

    We should do NOTHING until after the inaugeration. Bush should go to his ranch, Cheney should go to Texas and shoot more lawyers and the rest of us will just sit here and wait for competence to raise its unfamiliar and long lost head. Just don't let 'Quick Draw' Cheney see it.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  80. Bukky - Baltimore

    I'm probably going to get a lot of greif for this BUT note... every nation with nuclear power has been or become an ally to the US. India and Pakistan hated each other... they both got nukes and stopped threatening each other. We can have this high and mighty stand that Iran cant have nukes when we have nukes stuffed to the gills... they don't trust us and if you were them and witnessed the debacle that is "iraq and WMD" you wouldnt trust us either.

    American's are too quick to blow people up... guess what? The threat of violience does not make people want to dis-arm..

    May 27, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  81. John (Topock, AZ)

    It seems that no one in this world knows what is going on in Iran. This lack of intelligence is compounded by Iran's leader who is kind of squirrelly. Of course we have a braintrust in Washington that has been on occasions kind of squirrelly in the last eight years. Hopefully after the election we will have a President and Congress that understands the concept of diplomacy and international relations. What a concept, not all peace accords and trreaties comes out of the barrel of a gun.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:28 pm |
  82. Bill in St. Cloud, FL

    Bomb, bomb, bomb....bomb, bomb Iran.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  83. Marc

    We could "shock and awe" them by talking to them like fellow human beings. We could attempt to find middle ground and compromise. We could send fliers to the Iranian people pleading for their support and a revolt against their government and so called religious leaders.

    Failing that we can use Hillary's approach and just obliterate them.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  84. David from Menifee, Ca

    Here’s a good Idea lets try diplomacy with some real participation and not out source it to our European allies.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:29 pm |
  85. George

    As much as we would like to see them give up their ambitions to have atomic weapons, we should help them is any way we can to build atomic power plants just like the ones we have in the U.S. Then we will see if the still have atomic weapons on their minds. Then, and not before do we try anything, but talk. Other options can stay on the table, but to be used only if the need arises.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  86. Ronald

    Talk to them!

    May 27, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  87. JoAnn in Iowa

    First, let's not jump to any conclusions with no evidence and start another stupid war!! We should work with the United Nations and we should talk to Iran. We learn nothing by just posturing and strutting around like the Bush administration. Bush just provokes other nations. We need a new direction in foreign policy–more cooperation, repaired coalitions, more talking and less shooting.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  88. Matt Callaway in Omaha, NE

    The U.S. should engage with Iran. If they're determined to make a nuclear weapon, engagement will. If this fails, military action will have to be taken, but not necessarily by us.

    We already provide Israel with plenty of weapons to cripple Iran's alleged nuclear-weapons ambitions, and we know they can be counted on to pull the trigger before it's too late, and definitely before even we can. Israel has better intelligence, more guts, and more to lose than we do – let them take care of it.

    Of course all scenarios assume that a nuclear-armed Iran is a greater threat to us than the instability in oil and natural gas supplies that would surely materialize after military operations against Iran commence.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  89. Gayle Jacksonville, Illinois

    Let Bush go over to dismantle it!

    May 27, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  90. Jennifer in Minneapolis

    I don't think we should be telling people how to run their nuclear programs unless we're willing to take the same advice from others.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  91. Tom - Virginia

    Besides turning the clocks back 7 years and starting a dialogue when we had some real influence in the region.

    Sit down with them and talk. Find out what they need, what we can give them without destablizing the region even more, build a collation of like minded partners and negotiate from a position of strength.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm |
  92. Cliff

    Take two aspirins and call us after the election when we have an adult in charge.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  93. Don in Florida

    We need to keep up the effort of making sure Iran doesn't get nukes. Try to forment moderate Iranian groups to rise to power. We also need to use the carrot aproach instead of the stick approach, which hasnt really been working. Find something that they really want (not including nuclear technology) and use that, sort of like we did with N. Korea & China to a certain degree.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:40 pm |
  94. Will, San Jose CA

    Offer to sell them uranium enriched just enough for power plants, so there is no need for them to build their on centrifuges. Offer to build the electrical nuke plants for them so we know how they've been constructed. If all they want is the electrical power then they can have it, problem solved.

    If they really want more then that, which it appears they do, then that will be obvious.

    May 27, 2008 at 3:41 pm |
  95. Ray Kinserlow

    Years ago, President Eisenhower was wringing his hands over some sticky international situation muttering "What will we do?" One of his aides spoke up and said, "Why not do nothing, Mr. President?" The fact of Iranian nuclear weapons seems pretty quid pro quo to me. The Isrealis have been exposed as having nuclear weapons. Why not let them handle the situation?

    Ray Kinserlow
    Lubbock, Texas

    May 27, 2008 at 3:43 pm |
  96. M. Pappas

    Why ask us what we think? The Great and Powerful Barack Obama has the solution to every problem in the USA and abroad, right? I want to know if he can come to my house and get me a better quote for my kitchen re-model....

    May 27, 2008 at 3:59 pm |
  97. marti thompson

    Hillary has a plan !!!!

    May 27, 2008 at 4:00 pm |
  98. Chryssa

    Jack, I'd love to answer this question, but after Iraq, I simply don't know who or what to believe anymore.

    Boise, ID

    May 27, 2008 at 4:01 pm |
  99. Karl in CA

    I tend to believe our intelligence community rather then Bush intelligence. Bush and intelligence, now there's an oxymoron for you. If Bush had any intelligence in the first place, we wouldn't be in the war we are in. We need to wait it out until January when cooler heads and smarter minds will be looking at this situation with clarity and maybe even actually talk to those folks about it Obviously, I'm not referring to John McCain here.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:03 pm |
  100. Rod from Maryland

    Well, I guess if we were talking to them, maybe we could get diplomats permission to tour through places where our intelligence agents say we should have a look see. I also feel that part of our withdrawal strategy should be to redeploy some of thetroops to border lookout sites to stop weapons and Iranian forces from crossing the border into Iraq. But what do I know. Probably anything is better than what we're doing now. . .

    May 27, 2008 at 4:04 pm |
  101. Gordon, NJ

    Jack, Let's translate those old cold war "duck and cover" civil defense pamphlets into Farsi, and use our stealth bombers to drop a few million copies over Tehran, Qom, and other cities. Let the Iranian people learn to appreciate what it's like to live with the threat of imminent annihilation just as we did for 50 years with the Soviets.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:05 pm |
  102. Ann, Newton, New Jersey

    Why is everyone ready to push that red button? Is it definite that they have nuclear capabilities or is it another Iraq? We all know that the Iranian President acts like another Hitler but has anyone ever thought what the people of Iran think of him? There is a lot of unrest in his country against him. He should remember what happened to Hitler and think twice about his actions.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:06 pm |
  103. Rich

    Didn't we hear this story before about Iraq and Sadam? What has changed that makes our intelligence any more reliable? We had inspectors in Iraq that where positive that Sadam had weapons of mass destruction.

    I guess will just have to go in and see for ourselves and you know what that means? Are the American people willing to pay that price again?

    May 27, 2008 at 4:06 pm |
  104. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    The first thing the U.S. needs to do is denounce the threats against Iran. The U.S. then needs to recognize Iran is a big power player in any peace process in the Middle East and bring about some dialogue with Iran. Then carefully exit from Iraq.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:07 pm |
  105. Eugene in Northern California

    Jack, the Iranian answer is simple. Take their nuclear installations out, with conventional weapons now. It's tough to achieve, with a world community that supports an attack but is full, of spineless whimps. I'm sure Israel is up, for the task. The entire Middle East supports a raid, before it's too late. More talking is a waste of time and will result, in an Iranian nuclear weapon, within the year. Or, we could air drop Obama on them and they'd stop immediately.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:08 pm |
  106. Chris Swansea, MA

    Park a couple of Trident Submarines off of their coast and dare them to flinch!!!

    May 27, 2008 at 4:08 pm |
  107. Patrick D in MD

    Jack – I still remember that IRAN held American hostages for 444 days, and got away with it. We need to DENY DENY DENY their ability to build and deploy a Nuclear Weapon. Put a time limit on diplomacy and if that fails, Bomb them and their oil back to the 15th century. We offered carrots and got Bugs " Ahmahdinejad" Bunny in return!

    May 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  108. Ronald Holst

    well Jack We go just go a head and Bomb Bomb Iran ,or we could find anothe way it depends If you are a Bully Bush with out a pulpit .Or a reasonable human beinghuman being .

    May 27, 2008 at 4:09 pm |
  109. Linda in Virginia

    Well Jack, that depends who you are. McBush would blow them off the map. Obama would talk with them. And Jack, you should ask Hillary what she'd do before you elect Obama.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:10 pm |
  110. Pete, Fla.

    Elect McCain or Clinton, because all Obama will do is "hope" and "believe" that Iran wont bomb us.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:11 pm |
  111. Ralph in New York

    Jack, iran has shown itself to be supportive of numerous terrorist groups, anda good friend of those countries who also support terrorism. Their possession of nuclear weapons could pose a real threat not only to the United States or Israel, but to the whole world.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:11 pm |
  112. Randy

    I don't understand why we are so afraid to talk to people. Bush argued before 2004 elections and we should talk to N. Korea directly. Look at him now, we had to get South Korea and China involved. We had to negotiate with Libya, run by a KNOWN terrorist. Why can't we talk to the Mullahs for Iran? Cowboy politics has not worked so far, maybe talking will. Oh, someone needs to tell Bush that 'appeasing' Israel is talking to Syria just after his visit.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:12 pm |
  113. Wayne Peltier - an American Citizen in Ontario, Canada

    International pressure and diplomacy. Ahmedinajad is not the ruler of national security in Iran. Allatoylah Komenie (spelling?) is.

    Bush sure messed us up. And now McCain is sabre rattling about Iran. Misleading the American people again about the real truth in that country. No wonder they are against the GI Bill – they want to make sure they have enough of our youth to fight their never-ending wars.

    Bombing Iran will only costs millions of lives and remove all moderate voices in the region. If you want to attract millions of Middle Eastern people to radical terrorism – bombing Iran will be a guaranteed way to do it. And the US will be completely bankrupt in the meantime – can anyone say $20 a gallon for gas?

    May 27, 2008 at 4:12 pm |
  114. Brian - Trinidad

    Send the Messiah to explain the error of their ways.Isn't it that simple?

    May 27, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  115. Puddy Dunne

    The same thing we did when Russia, China, UK, France, India, Pakistan and Israel got them. Use the diplomacy that has prevented proliferation to this date and not the backstabbing, secretive and destructive ingnorance of the current administration. Or we could get under our desks right Jack?

    May 27, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  116. mish

    Sounds like the fear factor building up to me Jack
    how about trying diplomacy....that would be a switch!!

    personally I wouldnt put it past the republicans to orchestrate some kind of terror incident to get the vote !!
    in simple words I dont trust them ...period!!!

    May 27, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  117. Eli of Stockbridge

    Last I heard we had over 25,000 nukes by air and sea. Why waste taxpayers money on this when if deemed nessecary a couple of attack subs could make the situation right again!

    May 27, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  118. Neatha

    We gave Nuclear technology to India without a tready, but we told others no. Who died and made the US ruler of the world? Who are we to say who can pursue which type of technology? Let the neighboring countries and the UN their job and manage THEIR neighbors. We should worry more about our homeland. You know issues like the economy, hungry children, homelessness and gas prices.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:21 pm |
  119. chester

    I feel peace is better than nothing the world we live in needs to be secure and barack obama has the plan for are generation.I was told in church to love and talk to your enemies because if you do that we will then find and solution to the problem,because going to war if u see now doesnt even get you no where ask George Bush?

    May 27, 2008 at 4:22 pm |
  120. bill in PA

    Please get real!
    Iraq's W M D s? Do you still believe that one?
    Iran has NO credible program to develop any nuclear weapons. None what so ever!
    Under G H W Bush Rumsfeld forced nuclear technology on Iran when they were fighting Iraq. They did not want it then. They do not want it now.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:24 pm |
  121. Marine Grunt, Shrewsbury, NJ

    Jack: we should do to Iran the same we did with Israel, India and Pakistan NOTHING!! If Israel is concerned about Iran obtaining nuclear weapons then let them do their own fighting.
    Invading Iraq Americans have sacrifice blood and treasury on Israel behalf. ENOUGH!!

    May 27, 2008 at 4:25 pm |
  122. Tom, Avon, Maine, The Heart of Democracy

    We should elect Obama so we have competent leadership on vital issues instead of incompetent contradictory bumbling dolts that confound our friends and strengthen nut jobs around the world.

    May 27, 2008 at 4:32 pm |

    It's only a problem if they used it against America!

    May 27, 2008 at 5:11 pm |
  124. dennis hunter

    This is a world problem not just a united states problem. the world through the united nations should handle this problem which why the united nation was formed but has not lived up to its charter to handle world problems. the only time the united states should act is when we are attacked and then use all the power we have to destoy the attacker.

    May 27, 2008 at 5:13 pm |
  125. my president obama

    talk above nuclear we all think is kos ,But if we think deeper it still chance to stop them build up alsenal , simple just find the way to sitdown and talk above it with any enemy find solution peace talk that only the best way, 21 century talk better then using gun to finish it

    May 27, 2008 at 5:17 pm |
  126. sarah, Indiana

    oh here's a wacky idea, why dont we stop buying oil from them? what do you think they are using the money for anyway?

    May 27, 2008 at 5:17 pm |

    send them a field of dreams message. "if you build it, we will come." and the we'll dicuss what used to be their intentions!

    May 27, 2008 at 5:24 pm |
  128. Ginny in PA

    Nothing until the new president, Obama, takes office.

    May 27, 2008 at 5:29 pm |
  129. Shafi Alam

    Before Attacking Iraq, some intelligence reports were believed too much and some good ones were not believed at all. No WMD was found in Iraq. Let’s not repeat the same mistakes again. After Iran develops any Atomic weapons, bombing the facilities with those atomic weapons will cause more damage to Iran than attacking now. Let’s leave this to the next administration, probably Obama’s, to handle.

    Shafi A

    May 27, 2008 at 5:35 pm |
  130. don in naples, florida

    why shouldn't iran have nukes? Israel has nukes.

    May 27, 2008 at 5:35 pm |
  131. Shafi Alam

    Before Attacking Iraq, some intelligence reports were believed too much and some good ones were not believed at all. No WMD was found in Iraq. Let’s not repeat the same mistakes again. After Iran develops any Atomic weapons, bombing the facilities with those atomic weapons will cause more damage to Iran than attacking now. Let’s leave this to the next administration, probably Obama’s, to handle.

    Shafi Alam
    Austin Texas

    Now Tokyo Japan

    May 27, 2008 at 5:37 pm |
  132. Mischelle from Illinois

    Jack, We should do exactly what the next President of the Unted States said she would do~obliterate Iran if they do not drop their efforts to get a nuke. We certainly don't need to take a "pacifist" postiion like Mr. Obama suggests~ Our World as we know it would never be the same.

    May 27, 2008 at 5:38 pm |
  133. Royalprince

    I don't think the U.S. should do anything about Iran's nuclear program. It isn't any of our business. If the U.S., England, Israel, North Korea and other countries can have so many nuclear weapons, any other country should have the same right.

    The U.S. should quit trying to be the world policeman, always carrying a big stick.

    May 27, 2008 at 5:38 pm |
  134. William from Sanford, NC

    Let Isreal worry about it and if they want to start a fight let them pay for it with their own money and blood. The fact is that Israel is a huge liabilty to the United States and it's time to let them take care of their own problems.

    May 27, 2008 at 5:38 pm |
  135. Dave in Chapel Hill NC


    The fact that Iran continuously engages in multilateral mischief only means they don't believe we'll back-up our words. What that means is that if Iran continues to engage in proxy war in Iraq and Lebanon or if they continue to support rogue nations like Syria, then we send them a message just like Reagan did to Ghadaffi in Libya. As regards the nuclear issue – well, it would seem diplomacy has been about as effective under this administration as it was under President Carter's. But I think we need not worry – if we are incompetent to deal effectively with the Iranians, the Israeli's will.

    May 27, 2008 at 5:40 pm |
  136. Marty

    Well, if sanctions arent working, which is the way it has been for years, then tougher stance needs to take place regardless of whether or not Russia and Communist China like it or not. There is no place on this planet for any country to develope nuclear weapons whether peace or not

    May 27, 2008 at 6:09 pm |
  137. Ali

    Nothing - isn't knowledge free to the world? Even if they were making nuclear weapons, it's their right to do what they want.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:14 pm |
  138. Tom

    If our President, and his minions, could spell, the problem would have been resolved 5 years ago by invading IraN instead of IraQ.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:16 pm |
  139. Dimitri

    Bush himself talked with Hamas and with N. Korea ... its obvious from examples throughout history, of both talking and not talking to dangerous regimes, that negotiations are the way to go. Obama has to become president so that these situations and others are dealt with intelligence. Things need to get better, not worse.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  140. ALI

    Its very easy, Speak to the leader of Iran and come to an agreement. Easy. Good stuff Obama

    May 27, 2008 at 6:17 pm |
  141. Bob

    Congressman Ron Paul had the answer; "NON-INTERVENTION". In other words, leave them the hell alone.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:18 pm |
  142. John Greene

    The Iranian people are largely pro-American, while their government is not. The US should engage the government of Iran. The US should not be the aggressors. As a conservative Republican myself, I have zero concern right now about the Iranian nuclear program. I am far more concerned about the nuclear missiles that Pakistan has.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:19 pm |
  143. Mel

    Most of the population in this country knows that the war in Iraq is the worst action that our government has encounter in the history of our military. Since this war is inevitable, Bush is obviously not interested in talks. Obama might have the better solution and talk with Iran about their nuclear program and establish some kind of relationship in order to molify the situation for the people in that region.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  144. Donald L. Sherman

    Jack, We should wait until Barrack Obama is elected President, as it will take Statemanship not Brinksmanship. The current tactless and arbitrary regime must be replaced by one which will select only the brightest and the best, irrespective of party . What we don't need is a gasket blowing party hack, such as Senator McCain. This would only lead to more same old Mc Sameoh!!

    May 27, 2008 at 6:29 pm |
  145. Lois, Covelo, CA

    Hello Jack,
    I am reminded once again about the propaganda about WMDs in the lead up to the Iraq invasion (and endless occupation), based on intelligence that many knew back then was false, and that we all know to be false now. The neoconservatives have been beating the drums for war against Iran for years. Iran is a signatory of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, and insists their nuclear program is peaceful. Forged documents helped sell the Iraq war, remember?

    The question one must ask is why do the US & Israel so desperately want another war and invasion and occupation of yet another sovereign nation? Hmmmm, do the words "oil" and "empire" have anything to do with it?

    May 27, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  146. Kennedy Okechuwku, London U.K

    Fine, negotiating with Tehran will be one great trial but not with Bush/Republicans. This calls for the need to give the Obama message a chance cos America needs a change in foreign policy. Its obvious Bush fought the wrong war in Iraq as Iraq would have been a political weapon against Tehran.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:30 pm |
  147. Dolly

    Why should the U.S. be worried about Iran having nuclear weapons or not? After all the only country which has dropped a nuclear bomb is the U.S. We've gone from reds under the bed to Arabs everywhere. Has Iran ever threatened the U.S.? I'd really like to know. If I were Iranian, I would be pretty scared if I lived next to Iraq where there are hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops, a country which, first helped the irakis to declare war on my country and now is right beside me. I think I'd like to protect myself!

    May 27, 2008 at 6:34 pm |
  148. Davoud Motallebi

    War, will not work. I guess talking with any one have to be at first priority.
    I do really appreciate all what US doing in Middle East to help this area out of problems. But the language of War will not work any more. we would really like to see democracy in our country. but not with the language of the War. we dont want to see blood any more.
    I do really dream to see my country clean of Dictators. But not for the cost of any ones life.
    Hope to see the day, that US and Iran as a good friends, as 33 years a go.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:36 pm |
  149. Zach


    As a 21 year old college student Iran will face the same exact harsh sanctions like Iraq did for 13 years. Plus I hope this president currently goes to the UN to suggust this. Maybe longer or maybe shorter you never know for a country that has a population of 85 million people. Sorry Obama population does matter don't prove that the United States' Population makes us better then 99.9% of all countries of the world. Look at North Korea, Syria, Cuba, even the country Iran, etc. Go McCain !!!! Iran does have nuclear capblety so Obama give up on your navie ideas about meeting leaders of our enemies it inmoral.

    Clayton, Missouri

    May 27, 2008 at 6:37 pm |
  150. Jim

    Hi Jack! lets say every gouvernment has a right to pursue a "peacefull" nuclear program, i mean it is the most common future energy plan. The thing is why should Israel have nuclear nukes and Iran not? Is there somewhere written terrorists on their flag? Now as Obama said, we should engage talks with careffull conditions with Iran and unless the Us intelligence is pretty sure that they dont have nasty plans with their nuclear plan.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:39 pm |
  151. Randall Chapman Las Vegas,Nv

    Dear Jack,
    Let see what country close to Iran has nukes. India,Pakistan, Israel,Russia China. If I was a citizen of Iran I would want Nuke also. It would also upset me if a country that is a half a world away told me I couldn't have them because I didn't like Israel.
    Neither left or right red or blue. Just an American who puts America First.
    Randall Chapman Msgt (Ret)
    Vietnam Vet.

    May 27, 2008 at 6:46 pm |
  152. Oz

    Jack, every time I watch you on CNN you seem to be one of the few that always make sense out of anything be it Iran, North Korea, McCain, Obama or Madam Clinton. You know how to think and above all you are human. Keep up the good work.


    May 27, 2008 at 6:50 pm |