December 14th, 2009
05:00 PM ET

Time to take aggressive action against Iran?


Iranian soldiers stand near a S-200 surface-to-air missile during military maneuvers. (PHOTO CREDIT: Ali Shayegan/AFP/Getty Images)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

When it comes to Iran's nuclear program... the country just keeps thumbing its nose at the rest of the world.

The Times of London reports it has gotten its hands on secret documents that show Iran is working on testing a key final part for a nuclear bomb. The notes describe a four-year plan to test the component that triggers a nuclear explosion.

It's believed these documents are from 2007 - four years after Iran was thought to have ended its weapons program.

Tehran has repeatedly said that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but with these new documents, experts insist there's no possible use for what the Iranians are doing here - except for a nuclear bomb.

The latest revelation will likely increase pressure for tougher UN sanctions... not like it really matters. Iran has already pretty much ignored 3 sets of sanctions meant to curb its uranium enrichment program.

Meanwhile tens of thousands of students filled the streets of Iran for two days last week in the biggest anti-government protests in months. Many protesters shouted slogans against the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and chanted "Death to the Dictator."

The U.S. insists it won't sit by and ignore the protests in Iran... with one top diplomat saying the Iranian people "deserve decent treatment from their government."

Also today - Iran says it will try those three American hikers jailed since crossing the Iraqi border last summer. Iran has accused the Americans of spying - but the U.S. insists they were tourists. Some worry Iran could use them as bargaining chips in nuclear talks.

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Karla from Phoenix writes:
It doesn't matter what the street is shouting about in Iran or what the U.N. says. The leaders have a ton of oil money to keep them fat and warm. They aren't concerned about a tax rebellion or what anyone thinks, least of all American opinion. They know our military is tied up in 2 wars and those Europeans are all talk. They know we're not in a position to really do something and are rubbing it in our faces.

Jim writes:
Try stronger sanctions, hope for the moderation or overthrow of the Iranian regime, but prepare for military action.

Dennis writes:
Action against Iran, for what? We have 3 wayward travelers who have crossed illegally into their country. Iran is threatened on all borders. We have them surrounded with troops in Iraq and troops in Afghanistan. No wonder they want nuclear weapons.

Theodore writes:
Yes, it is long past time to take action against Iran. But will the U.S.? Not very likely. Or to make myself quite clear, fat chance. The task will fall to Israel. Israel is the only country with the guts to execute the tough calls.

Chandler writes:
The idea of taking "aggressive action" against Iran is utter nonsense, and the faster everybody admits that, the better. Can't anyone out there read a map? Iran can stop the tanker traffic through the Straight of Hormuz by throwing rocks. They don't even have to actually throw rocks; if they threaten to do so, the insurance companies will stop the tankers. If you think the economy is a treat now, try cutting out a quarter of the world's oil supply.

John writes:
So what do you want to do, Jack? Send in troops? Old guys like you and me will have to sign up as that's all we have left. Let’s try diplomacy, sanctions, etc. for as long as possible and then let President Obama come up with another alternative...he's smarter than us anyway!

Russ writes:
Kinda sounds like it, Jack. What's the word from Tel Aviv?

Filed under: Iran
soundoff (258 Responses)
  1. Jerrye in Sun Valley Idaho

    Just what would be the source of money and personnel for such action?No,no,no.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:39 pm |
  2. john ..................... marlton, nj

    No, why should we? To make Israel safer? Are the kives of our American soldiers for sale, to help Israel...I think not.... Perhaps we should demand that Israel return the nuclear weapons they have ... Do they really need nukes to kill and mame Palestinians ? I think not ...

    December 14, 2009 at 3:41 pm |
  3. Tom in Desoto, Tx

    Exactly what did you have in mind Jack? Not militiary action. Iran has 3 times as many people and it's twice the size of Iraq so there won't be any "troops marching in", that would be suicide Let's not forget there aren't enough resources, and no other country seems to be willing to do anything. The same applies to North Korea.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:41 pm |
  4. john ..................... marlton, nj

    No, why should we? To make Israel safer? Are the lives of our American soldiers for sale, to help Israel...I think not.... Perhaps we should demand that Israel return the nuclear weapons they have ... Do they really need nukes to kill and mame Palestinians ? I think not ...

    December 14, 2009 at 3:41 pm |
  5. Michael and Diane Phoenix AZ

    Sure...why not start a third war we can't afford? The problem is that the US government thinks that no other country should be allowed WMD's except us. Us equals U.S. doesn't it?

    December 14, 2009 at 3:42 pm |
  6. Michael

    Absolutely not. Iran poses no threat to the United States, so it has no reason to interfere. If other countries that it does threaten wish to take charge and become aggressive, then perhaps the United States can lend support, but under no circumstances does the United States have the right to be aggressive against Iran.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:43 pm |
  7. Sandra in Temecula, CA

    Past time. Iran is just playing games with the rest of the world and having Obama in office has only added to their fun. We can only hope Obama realizes his desire to sit down and negotiate with Iran is not realistic. We need to be strong and respected, not liked.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:44 pm |
  8. Ed

    Yes, they should send in Dick Cheney with his shotgun. He'll have to go alone of course, to prevent him from shooting any of his fellow soldiers.


    December 14, 2009 at 3:46 pm |
  9. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    Aren't two wars enough for now? We need to let the UN take action, not the God like US. It's time for America to take care of Americans.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:47 pm |
  10. Lou from North Carolina

    Why don't we ignore Iran until they do something more stupid than they are doing now. They really enjoy needling us and we always react. Why don't we play a little bridge with them and wait until they make a real stupid bid while we are holding and unbeatable hand. Why don't we try to make them look stupid by ignoring them?

    December 14, 2009 at 3:52 pm |
  11. J W

    Agressive meaning sanctions? OK. Agressive meaning military action? We need to remind ourselves of lessons learned when we turn the DEFENSE Department into the OFFENSE Department, sending it on missions to apply political will when politicians don't have the stomach, then nerve or the brains to do the job themselves.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
  12. Ed

    No. There's a good chance the people of Iran may throw out the current regime if we don't provide it with xenophobic propaganda.


    December 14, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
  13. william fitzwater

    Its all about leverage we need to find way to get leverage on Iran . If that happens then maybe we might get some where. However under the saber wagging Bush admin Iran did behave better .

    December 14, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
  14. John from Alabama

    Jack: It is past time to deal with the Iranians. I hope the Israelis will destory one of their nuclear sites an prove to the world that Iran is only interested in developing nuclear weapons. Sanctions do not work and Irans promises are as worthless as sand in the desert. We need strong action that makes a point. No sanctions, please.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:54 pm |
  15. Moe dallas tx

    Yes, if the people of the United States appoint me "King Czar" I will train the Ten million unemployed people, take the two million that are in our prisons and we will invade the entire middle east .After about three weeks of my war, we can reduce oil to nothing,sell gas for 15 cents a gallon and everyone can have a beautiful life thereafter !!

    December 14, 2009 at 3:57 pm |
  16. Mark, Bradenton, FL

    No we should have done this 9 years ago instead iraq and afghanistan.

    December 14, 2009 at 3:59 pm |
  17. Tony from Southport

    One simple word spoken to the powers to be in Israel from our esteemed leader.... GO.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:14 pm |
  18. Rick McDaniel / Lewisville, TX

    Info has already come to light, that Iran is preparing for war with the US. That info in hand, should indicate that we need to be preparing for that event.

    The moment that Iran has atomic weapons, we can expect the beginning of WW III, aka the attack of Islam on the world at large.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:16 pm |
  19. Jill

    No. There are many countries across the globe with nuclear projects either planned or underway.

    There were many dictators across the globe, but we decided Saddam was the biggest threat. We used the same logic to go to war with Iraq and look where that got us.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:20 pm |
  20. steve in virginia

    I think the Iranian people should be allowed to do this themselves. Instead, I prefer that we stay focused and take agressive non-violent action against our own government.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:29 pm |
  21. Weldon from Canada

    If Iraq keeps thumbing it's nose at the rest of the World the way it has been, then the time has come to remove that thumb. All the Nations should see these actions as being very crucial to Peace in the World.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:30 pm |
  22. William Joseph Miller, Los Angeles

    Define "aggressive action."
    Before we decide to bomb Iran, as cowboy McCain would have us do, let's look at some facts.
    Iran is reeling from increased unrest.
    According to an article in the December 14 issues of Newsweek by Rana Foroohar Babak Dehghanpisheh, Iran may stop subsidizing gas, food, other basic goods. Iran is suffering from soaring inflation. It has plundered its treasury to pay off cronies of President Mamoud Ahmadinejad. Iran's various government militias and secret police are notoriously corrupt and Iran imports 40 percent of its gasoline.

    Furthermore, nuclear power is a very expensive form of energy. It requires an endless number of government subsidies. New European nuclear power plants are put on hold because of massive cost overruns and defective designs. In this country, nuclear power is such a risky proposition, that no one will invest in it without 100 % loan guarantees from the government. In addition, nuclear power requires a lot of water, something Iran does not have. It's for these reasons, that Abu Dhabi, across the Persian Gulf is investing heavily in solar energy. (The leaders there are smart enough to realize the petro party is over.)

    In view of these conditions, Iran's government would actually welcome military strikes. It would be impossible for military strikes to wipe out nuclear power installations. Military action would give the corrupt regime of the mullahs a new lease on life. And our military right now is over-extended. We cannot do anything more than a couple of abortive air raids, which will not eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities.

    Obama has already begun imposing sanctions on Iran. Defense Secretary Gates says more sanctions are imminent. Thanks to Obama's efforts to reach out, we can get more cooperation from other countries, if we choose to impose sanctions. This route could well increase the unrest that Iran is already experiencing.

    Ultimately, the strongest weapon we have against Iran is switching from fossil fuels to green technology. In the short run, the less gasoline we consume, the lower the price, and the less revenue for Iran. In the long run, the faster we can develop green technology, the faster we can destroy Iran's one major trump card.
    And unless we are willing to break free of oil, all this talk about "aggressive action" is nonsense.

    P.S. This question is another big reason I'm glad I voted for Obama.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:30 pm |
  23. Darren

    With almost all of our troops already tied up in nation building in the Afghanistan and Iraq who are we going to send in to fight Iran, the Salvation Army?

    December 14, 2009 at 4:33 pm |
  24. Steve in Chula Vista, CA

    Do we have a choice? Our military is spread thin and we are in an anti war mood right now, with a president who has shown our weaknesses to the rest of the world...........and Iran knows it. Iran is seeing how far they can push us.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:33 pm |
  25. Susan Frost

    We should send just as many troops to Iran as they sent to fight alongside George Washington in our revolution.

    Tuscaloosa AL

    December 14, 2009 at 4:33 pm |
  26. Sherri-Illinois

    TIME for OTHER countries to step up to the plate and TIME for the USA to fix their own problems right here at home! Enough of being Policeman of the world when we are in a Economic Meltdown!

    December 14, 2009 at 4:35 pm |
  27. southerncousin

    The time has passed, all we can do now is apologize to them and send them nasty notes like Obama and Hillary are doing. Perhaps, they could talk to them. That always works. This administation is a bad joke that threatens all of our lives.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:35 pm |
  28. Randy from Salt Lake City

    Hey Jack, where do you think these "secret documents" came from? Could it be that they came from the same place the "yellowcake" and the "40,000 tons of chemical weapons" came from? I saw this movie before. It was called "Iraq."

    December 14, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
  29. Lil Me

    Yes, it's time the international community took more aggressive action against Iran, and those three jailed hikers are unfortunately going to be used as pawns.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  30. Jimmy in Houston, TX

    Certainly time to do something! Our inaction speaks louder than our "harsh" empty words.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  31. david doherty

    Jack I have a question, how is it possible that the most scrutinized country in the world, with hundreds of thousands of satellite images of Iran, we couldn't tell they were building a nuclear industrial plant for 7 yrs. We need to fire a lot of intelligent personnel, or should I say non-intelligent personnel. What are we paying for, if Iran can build this type of plant right under our noses, can we continue to claim that we are the most powerful country in the world? Most gullible seems to fit better.
    Dave from Peterborough, NH.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:39 pm |
  32. Zach, California Republic

    A UN intervention might be the best course of action but the EU should send the bulk of the troops and supplies, Iran is more of a threat to them than to us!

    December 14, 2009 at 4:40 pm |
  33. John Jahn

    Your and your ilk's cowboy mentality will bring about the crash of the world economy, WWIII and the downfall of the USA as we know it today.

    The ruling class in Iran cannot wait for a "crippling" sanctions or Israeli/USA military strike to fan the nationalistic fervor among Iranians and buttress their crumbling regime, call all dissidents and pro-democracy groups "the agents of the enemy" as Ahmadinejad just yesterday started labeling them as such.

    This is the height of hypocrisy!
    The morally bankrupt Power Elite that run the US government and the Main Stream Media and constantly subvert the true democracy in USA have no right to judge or act against other countries on "democratic" or "humanitarian" grounds

    December 14, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
  34. Doug - Dallas, TX

    At this point, we should wait to see if the internal protests achieve anything, but the time is getting close to doing something. Sanctions won't work and the only ones who will suffer will be the Iranian people not the leaders. Iran is a bully and a bully only understands force so if Iran does not back down, let the Israeli's blow them up.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  35. Tina Tx

    So you want to finish bankrupting the country, do you? We cannot afford another war. Leave them alone, keep an eye on them and if they start sending stuff our way have Israel blow them off the face of the earth.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:44 pm |
  36. Jeremy in Albuquerque

    I think we can do without any more wars right now, Jack. Keep the political and economic pressure on the buttholes of the Iranian regime. Hopefully, Russia and China will start supporting sanctions and stop supporting Tehran, and the Iranian people will fix their country's problems.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:45 pm |
  37. Paul, Austin, Texas

    I think if we did any action against Iran it would spread us to thin and to a point of reinstatement of the draft. We can not be everywhere at any one time. We have put ourselfs in this position of being unable to really take any action against Iran due to our other two wars.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:46 pm |
  38. brian

    Iran is going to develop a nuke if we do nothing. I personally think that is one thing that we do not want to happen.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:47 pm |
  39. Dan, Chantilly VA

    What aggressive action could we possibly take? Invade them? We don't have the man-power for that right now. Not to mention that starting a war with Iran would probably spread throughout all of Asia if not into Europe and Africa. Iran has very powerful allies who are just waiting for us to make a move so that they can justify their own aggressive actions against Israel, Japan, Eastern Europe and everyone in-between. This is one of those problems that we have to monitor very carefully, but stay out of it until we have no choice. Iran is on the brink of revolution and there's no reason to do anything if it's going to fix itself.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:48 pm |
  40. Luci - Pekin, IL.

    No, we are already in two wars that Republicans got us into. Why would we want another war? If they were in office we would already be in a war with Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan and who knows where else. We don't need anymore wars. We aren't the Worlds police force.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:49 pm |
  41. Ron in Rochester, New York


    No it isn't time for the U.S. to take aggressive action against Iran. It is time that the rest of the world stepped up to the plate. Why should this country step into another void created by the cowardice of our so called allies in continental Europe as well as the devious intentions of China and Russia.
    While doubtful, if we could somehow convince Iran not to use these weapons against Israel, by all means, let them have them. I wonder how comfortable Russia, Turkey and the like would be with a nuclear Iran hovering in the shadows.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:50 pm |
  42. RIPScottBaio

    Jack, my answer to your question is a resounding "NO!". Now is actually the time to send our military to fight here, on American soil, against these targets: the KKK, the neo-Nazi's, the Latin Kings, MS-13 and the Mafia. I'm sick and tired of hearing about sending our military overseas when we have plenty of "trash" to clean up right here within our own borders.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:56 pm |
  43. Joe CE

    If possible, we should start arming the dissidents. An attack on nuclear sites would tend to unite them behind the government.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
  44. Russ in Johnston

    Kinda sounds like it, Jack. What's the word from TelAviv?

    December 14, 2009 at 4:59 pm |
  45. Heather

    Sanctions do not work as shown by the lack of results from the multiyear efforts against the South African apartheit regime and that of Saddam's Iraq. Sanctions resulted in hurting the poorest and most vulnerable in those societies. Instead, use diplomacy as the Byzantines did, as war by other means. It's far easier to sell sanctions at home as showing one's toughness, but they are worse than ineffective as the group in power in the target country can use them to reinforce their position as the nation is under seige from outside.

    December 14, 2009 at 4:59 pm |
  46. eric gregory

    Excuse me, but how can Iran ever compete with the country boasting the most WMD's on the planet. It should be obvious they only want to defend themselves from an almost imminent attack from Israel or the leader in war and aggression, you.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
  47. JENNA

    Is now the time to take aggressive action against Iran?

    Why? They are a sovereign nation that has a right to have nukes just as much as America does. Do I like that? No. But it is a fact that they have the right just as we do.

    As for Democracy, it is for the people of Iran to figure out and we should not stick our noses in it. Would we want Iran to stick their noses into our government?

    Why are the Conservatives hell bent on trying to get us into yet another war? Aren't 2 enough??

    Roseville CA

    December 14, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
  48. Dennis north Carolina

    let the french take care of iran because they are a business partner of that country which means they are making money so they should be held for their action.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
  49. sharon

    not yet, Jack......they will make it very clear from whom and when and if
    he..mr..amin..jab... needs a visit.......he can not help himself.......that little short dude. You notice I said he........not them.
    They do not want a visit.
    They ,however, are not in control................................yet.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
  50. bob, oshawa, ontario

    Jack, the Times of London report sounds like another weapons of mass destruction ploy. The other question is just who is urging the protests in the streets. Is it some American neo-con organization bent on encouraging another military intervention? The U.S. military hasn't successfully completed its missions in Afghanistan and Iraq and now would consider a third war front. If it does happen, then Obama's Nobel Peace Prize would look even more ridiculous.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
  51. Cheryl

    Yes, but I don't see how. Outr military is spread so thin now, as we are strung out on two wars where we should not be already. This is how Cheney (and I guess Obama, apparently) doesn't understand how these wars make us less safe.
    As far as bargaining chips – any moron who decides to visit Iran during these times does not deserve our consideration. We cannot be held hostage due to someone's idiot decision to go to a hostile country as a tourist.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:03 pm |
  52. Mark, Worcester MA

    One of the biggest reasons we're so disliked over there is that we won't stay out of their lives. So when the people are gearing up for a revolution on their own, and haven't been looking for our help... no, I don't think it's time.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:03 pm |
  53. Angie

    What, Iran?

    Do You mean the same country whose government informant told the Bush administration that Sadam did have WMDs, when it was Iran all along who was building and had the WMDs.

    Do You mean the same country who Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld claimed in a news conference on TV that Iran is our friend.

    Do You mean the same country who keeps claiming that the US is the 'Great Satan?'

    Do you mean the same country who keeps threatening to destroy Israel?

    No, you just couldn't possibly mean Iran, could you?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:04 pm |
  54. Terrell Walker of Escondido California

    If taking aggressive actions against Iran means using military force,then the answer is no. The U.S. is already stretched too thin militarily and military action would alienate the Iranian populace with whom we are currently supporting. There are sanctions that would work however, Such as cutting off oil sales and gasoline supplies. More violence in the region is not the answer.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
  55. Michaeljwjr

    Before we believe anything that comes out of Britian or the United States, lets' get an impartial group to go in and see what's going on. We had "proof" there were WMDs in Iraq when the US went in there. Let's finally learn from history before we blindly support the wishes of the Government.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
  56. ken, DE

    Aggressive action against iran for what? The u.s. has 10,000 nukes and we have used them against japan, but we don't want anyone else to have them. Israel has hundreds of nukes but they don't want iran to have them, why? Israel has bombed iraq, syria, lebanon, and the palestininas but yet they have nuclear weapons, Why?. Iran can just remove themselves from the non-proliferation treaty and then they wil not be in violation of any laws. Israel is not a part of the non-proliferation treaty and therefore they can have all the nuclear weapons they desire. We are on the verge of bankruptcy and yet we want to start a war with iran. Why?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:06 pm |
  57. Jerry Jacksonville, Fl.

    No, when they have weapons that can reach the United States we need to keep the hell out of there.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:08 pm |
  58. gerry luimes

    Iran is like the school bully that has to be silenced.But he has to be an "active bully'.Iran ,thus far,has a big mouth an probably similar evil
    future plans.However it is not (yet) active.Even if it were,where are the countries with the financial and military were-with-all to do an effective spanking job ? The USA is by definition "broke".All we can say now is:
    "The universe will enfold as it must."
    Gerry at Edmonton,Can.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:09 pm |
  59. James

    Sure Jack, they have weapon of mass destruction. Let's invade them! Let's start a new military, unemployed men and women!

    December 14, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  60. George, Montrose,PA

    Absolutely! This just may be the right spot to show a force of streghth in the area. I would say, "drop the big one," but there are so many good people there who actually reject that government and want change. How about a couple of those new bunker blasters directed on those 2 freaks and the sites in question?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:10 pm |
  61. Greg, Ontario

    That day was September the 12th. If Tehran or an equally pro Terrorist city had been flattened that day the problems in the middle East would be much smaller.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  62. Bud Rupert, Reston, VA

    It's none of the U.S.' business what these countries do or do not do.
    That's how we get ourselves embroiled in these no-win situations.
    If you stop and think about it, every war or police action that we have attempted – notwithstanding WW 11- we have failed. It's awful hard -if not impossible- fighting a war on another mans home turf when he does not want you there. Especially when you have more rules of engaement then carter has liver pills. I don't care what the experts say. You can't do it!

    We should mind our own damn business unless we are DIRECTLY threatened then we give NO QUARTER. if that means taking over the whole country to iliminate the threat that's what we do.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:11 pm |
  63. Russ in PA

    Now is the time to back off, and let Iran alone. And while we're at it, it's time to shut down the wars and all the overseas bases. Who is going to pay for all this insanity?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
  64. A. Smith, Oregon

    Jack, its long past time to take aggressive action against Iran. A joint strike attack with Israel and our foreign allied partners should erase all of Iran's ambitions along with the Ayatollahs, Clerics, Immans and Mullahs that spew out wave after wave of suicide bombers and hatried for core American values world-wide.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  65. The Broker.

    Obama would not dare use this weapon in conflict! Israel will though, eventually. Just so Obama wont be blaimed. He does not have the guts of George Bush, nor his Dad..

    December 14, 2009 at 5:14 pm |
  66. Docb

    No, Jack, the 'selected' leader Ahmadinijad is just trying to get acknowledged by anyone other than Chavez , on the World stage...If they do want to build ten new plants –it would take years and billions. The Russians and the Chinese are beginning to turn away from him and the Revoltution inside the country is still there...festering. It took 2 years the last time

    Small man small mind– we have another saber rattler in N.Korea...Note that they use the same tactics but cave when close to the abyss..The real threat may be Israels 'selected' leader BiBi...who has itchy fingers and is looking for a diversion away from the January Gaza problem! It is best to just never acknowledge them by name from our leaders only their atrocities/actions!

    December 14, 2009 at 5:15 pm |
  67. Danny Bucksnort Tn.

    Yeah right Jack. With what? All of our troops and assets are tied up in other meaningless wars. We can not afford to start another one. Sanctions only hurt innocent people. If they Iran has all they need to make a nuclear weapon then they got it from somewhere that is not playing by the rules. That is the enemy.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  68. Thom Richer

    It is time we stop all Imperialistic actions against any country and take care of ourselves. We preach peace, freedom. human rights, and autonomy, yet we are the only country country invading foreign lands with armed forces. Now we want to go into another? Something is very wrong with such thinking and actions. Do not trade with these countries, do not involve ourselves in their politics and problems, practice what we preach, take care of our own people, do not permit or support American businesses who move off shore, and bring our troops home yesterday. Maybe the world will get the message along with all the war mongers in Congress.

    Thom Richer
    Negaunee, MI

    December 14, 2009 at 5:17 pm |
  69. Dave, Brooklyn, NY

    Don’t we have enough problems here. First we have to get out of the two, now senseless and irrelevant, wars (to all but Haliburton and Blackwater), before we can even think about another preemptive strike. Wait until Iran actually does something stupid, then bomb them back into the stone age. They’re half way there anyway. In the mean time we need to go after the animals who killed 3000 of our people and send every last one of them back to Allah. Only then can we afford to continue our belligerence throughout the rest of the region, which of course, will result in more attacks.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:19 pm |
  70. Allen L Wenger

    Read my lips, "no new wars". We don't need to go to war with every country we disagree with, what the hell is wrong with you people?

    Mountain Home ID

    December 14, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  71. Bizz, Quarryville, Pennsylvania

    I feel we been patient and have exhausted all our diplomatic options and now it's time for action. We can't keep on leaving them thumb their noses at us.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
  72. Tom from Vermilion, Ohio

    Probably should, but we just can't afford it. Maybe after we get the economy back on top. Get back to me then.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  73. Bernie of Lowell, MA

    What a great economy 'stimulus'! Another war will force the government to go deeper into hock, but it will create many "rosie the riviter" jobs , especially as the only manufacturing we've got left here is related to weapons development.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:21 pm |
  74. Anthony.....Swedesboro, NJ

    Iran is begging for a fight and Israel is already champing at the bit to accommodate them. If you remember the Cuban missile crisis, the US took bold steps to prevent an enemy employing nuclear missiles on our doorstep.
    Israel is the perfect proxy for America to ameliorate this threat. They're already despised by the Muslim world and and their hatred is inconsolable. I say let Israel have at them since we've already seen their efficiency in this regard.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:22 pm |
  75. Bert, Iowa City

    And while we're at it Jack, perhaps we should take aggressive action against Israel which possesses more than 100 nuclear weapons in violation of international law, is in violation of more than 100 UN security counsel resolutions and has aggressively attacked all of it's neighbors, (not to mention the citizenry of it's occupied territories), during it's short existence. Iran has not attacked another country in more than a century. Who do you think is more likely to use a nuclear device–Iran or Israel? Who is the real aggressor?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:23 pm |

    Oh, Jack... just what we need! Another war in the Mideast! The other countries we invaded could not defend themselves... Iran can. Let Isreal do it for a change. We cannot keep being the world police!

    However, if Isreal does it, they need to do it right. Flatten the place!

    December 14, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
  77. Darrell Wright from Anderson, Indiana

    I think it is only a matter of time before the citizens of Iran actually take control of the country. Maybe we should help them, but the news media is not all that helpful considering there main story is always about some celebrity few people actually care about.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  78. Jim


    Sure, let's show'em who's boss. Why should we settle for two wars when we could have three?

    Reno, Nevada

    December 14, 2009 at 5:28 pm |
  79. William of Michigan

    Us AMERICANS, can always find a country to have a war with.
    When people attack us, you bet. But now we pussy foot with them instead of making sure they will not attack again.

    Not exactly sure on the count, but, on "9-11" I believe 19 of them were Saudi Arabians???hmmmm why didn't we attack Saudi Arabi.?Instead we attack/invade Iraq. You don't think oil...and the bottom line money had anything to do with it?

    The ONLY reason, our government is worried about Iran is our buddies in Israel. The Jews control our budgets, our entertainment industry and many other corporations.

    Why should we protect other countries when our government can't protect us? They can't keep MILLIONS of Mexicans out of our country.

    No Jack, it is all about money, pretty much always has been and always will be.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  80. George, Montrose,PA

    Absolutely! This just may be the right spot to show a force of strength in the area. I would say, "drop the big one," but there are so many good people who actually reject that government and really want change. How about a few of those new bunker blasters directed on those 2 freaks and the sites in question???

    December 14, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  81. Linda in Arizona

    Gee Jack, I don't think we can afford another illegal war. Better have the Israelis do it for us.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
  82. Joan Heck Southern Illinois

    My question to you is,- With what? Thanks to Bush we already have 2 wars. How many more wars do we need? How many more of our people do we need to kill? How much more do we need to borrow from China? How could you even think of another war?
    Now we don't have enough soldiers or money to fight another war. We don't have enough money now to take care of our own sick and hungry people. Let's clean up our own act, before we try to clean up the rest of the world.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:35 pm |
  83. Will from San Jose, CA

    Iran is at a crucial position in it's own internal struggle. An entire new generation there is on the edge of revolution. The worse possible thing we could do is directly assault the country, creating a common enemy for both the established government and those who are protesting in the streets.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:40 pm |
  84. Tim

    Mr. Cafferty, WHY do we feel obliged to take action against other soveriegn nations at all? A small nuclear power with human rights violations in the middle east? Are cameras allowed in the west bank? If we choose to treat one nation in a particular fashion – why not treat ALL nations in the same manner? From your daily questions, one might gather that this nation has enough problems of it's own – not the least of which is the mess it makes when it noses around in the affairs of other nations, with utter disregard for the concept of even-handedness. The better question is – Can the rats aboard a sinking ship afford to make waves?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:43 pm |
  85. Tony San Francisco

    Absolutely not.

    The failed Bush doctrine is hopefully a doctrine of the past.

    As far as the Americans who trespassed into Iran are concerned, it is about time that so called activists respect the sovereignty of other nations and not expect the State Department to intervene on their behalf.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:43 pm |
  86. Tom, Avon, Me, The Heart of Democracy

    "Aggressive action," is a bit vague. If you are talking about economic sanctions, they have only hurt our allies, the Iranian people. If you are talking about nuking them, how does that not point out the hypocrisy of having more nuclear weapons than anyone else and being the only nation to use them against civilians? Diplomacy and good will is our only choice of not shooting ourselves in the foot, and allowing the Iranians to elect a responsible government. Saber rattling insures that Ahmadinejad types stay in power.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:43 pm |
  87. Richard, Kankakee, IL.

    Now that is a dumb idea, to put us into 3 losing war at the same time, we can't afford one losing war, but here you are trying to get us into another one. If we or Israel attack Iran, we will have to fight all of the Muslim nations at the same time! That really would be dumb! Also we are too broke to fight anymore wars, contrary to popular belief the military does not produce anything, but death, resources being wasted, and lives lost!

    Starting wars is not a good economic plan to run our country!

    December 14, 2009 at 5:44 pm |
  88. Rob of Brooklyn

    No, its time to get the hell out of there. we've wasted enough of our hard earned money on Bush's daddy's war. We should never have gone in there to begin with.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:45 pm |
  89. Michael Alexandria, VA

    Aggressive action means war, so the answer is no. I'm not even sure that sanctions won't backfire to make the regime stronger. Something covert sounds like a better bet, preferably in the form of material support for the opposition and without US fingerprints.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:47 pm |
  90. pat in lexington, Ky.


    Probably best, for now, to keep the U.S.;s involvement with Iran the way it already is: secret and diplomatic. Let the CIA do its thing.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:50 pm |
  91. Randy T

    Yes. Let's give iran the same weapons and money that we give israel. That way we can get rid of two ENEMIES at once.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:51 pm |
  92. Mike M, Lady Lake, Fl

    Your question – Is now the time to take aggressive action against Iran? Oh yea Jack, let's open another 'can of worms'. It will go well with the other two cans that we have open, and haven't finished yet. To what end, and to what cost?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:51 pm |
  93. katiec Pekin, IL

    Are you saying we need another war, Jack?
    Due to previous mistakes our resouces are almost used up, man power and financially. It is past time for the rest of the world to
    start righting the wrongs. Our country cannot continue to be the
    front runner, only responsible nation to seriously address bad

    December 14, 2009 at 5:53 pm |
  94. Bert, Iowa City

    Oh, I forgot to add, perhaps this agressive stance toward Iran has something to do with the fact that Iran cradles the Caspian sea basin, believed to have the largest oil fields ever discovered. You think?

    December 14, 2009 at 5:56 pm |
  95. U.S.S. Texas C.G.N. 39 sherman Tx.

    It was time for aggression 30 yrs. ago when I spent nine months at sea waiting for penut brain Jimmy Carter to deside we were going to put our tails between our legs and run this is Carters fault that we have to deal with this now.

    December 14, 2009 at 5:56 pm |
  96. george

    Let's not repeat the "weapons of mass destruction" error we made when we bombed Irag. Having said this, we should not allow Iran to possess such weapons once we know for certain rumors are confirmed. If Russia and China do not accept the gospel, they should be held guilty by association and sanctions imposed.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:01 pm |
  97. Dave, Brooklyn, NY

    Don’t we have enough problems here. First we have to get out of the two now senseless and irrelevant wars (to all but Haliburton and Blackwater), before we can even think about another preemptive strike. Wait until Iran actually does something stupid then bomb them back into the stone age. They’re half way there anyway.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:02 pm |
  98. Mo

    Isn't it time for our country to take a deep breath and evaluate our foreign policy as it regards which countries we intend to take military action against. For example, let's bring our troops out of Iraq, shouldn't have been there in the first place. Let's get the troops out of Afghanistan, we missed the boat on that one and we shouldn't be nation building; if the Afghanistan people want basic changes in their government, let them do the work of changing things there., As for Iran, the people there are working for change inside their own country. Why don't we "just give peace a chance" and see what happens internally in that country before we start the drum beat for war. Let's stop sending our kids to die in foreign lands for the benefit of the military-industrial complex and for corporations.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:02 pm |
  99. Esther Massillon Ohio

    all I have to say is Operation Ajax 1953. They still mad about that I say leave them alone. We do not need anymore on our plate.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:04 pm |
  100. Laura

    And do what? Large scale invasion is out..we don't have the troops and China and Russia would more than likely come to Iran's defense. Bomb specific targets? I'm sure there are many more hidden areas that aren't known. Keep in mind the second they launched a nuke they would be obliterated off the map so while they're extremist they're not stupid.

    Let the CIA and Special Ops do a covert middle of the night regime change. The country is ready for it and I'm sure there are more than enough qualified people willing to step up.

    As for the documents: After the Bush administration I wouldn't be so quick to believe anything.

    San Angelo, TX

    December 14, 2009 at 6:05 pm |
  101. Bill in Arizona

    Hello Jack, Yes, now is the time for America to take aggressive action against Iran. The seem to want Nuclear weapons and lord know who they will aim them at, probably Israel and the United States. It's time we put them in their place (hades) and they can all be surrounded by a bunch of moslim virgins.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
  102. Brian from Denver

    What keeps coming back to my mind on this issue is Hitler and the Third Reich. He was ignored, coddled, and enabled by other world leaders for years while his threat grew. By the time those leaders acted, it was too late for peace and millions of lives were destroyed. I am afraid that history will repeat itself here, but I hope it does not. Iran is a belligerent, totalitarian regime with little respect for its own people and no respect for others. I think it's time to CRUSH it, before we are forced to watch it make good on its threats armed with nuclear weapons. That is another holocaust waiting to happen. We must not let it.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
  103. bob

    it's long past time to deal with Iran. They have been left alone for too long. They are responsible for the deaths of our men and women in Iraq. Not to mention we still owe them for the hostages way back when.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
  104. Bill in Arizona

    Hello Jack, Yes, now is the time for America to take aggressive action against Iran. They seem to want Nuclear weapons and lord know who they will aim them at, probably Israel and the United States. It's time we put them in their place (Hades) and they can all be surrounded by a bunch of Moslim virgins.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:08 pm |
  105. karla

    It doesn't matter what the 'street' is shouting about in Iran or what the UN says. The leaders have a ton of oil money to keep them fat and warm. They aren't concerned about a tax rebllion or what anyone thinks – least of all American opinion. They know our military is tied up in 2 wars and those Europeans are all talk. They know we're not in a position to really do something and are rubbing it in our faces.

    Karla in Phoenix AZ

    December 14, 2009 at 6:09 pm |
  106. Bert, Iowa City

    Iran simply recognizes the fact that it needs nuclear weapons to protect it's vast Caspian basin oil riches from US aggression.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:09 pm |
  107. spinbizkitt in anaheim california

    Where's Harry Truman when you need him. Just as this nation was with the japanese during WW2 we should be the same way and thats just drop the bomb on them and their whole damn nation

    December 14, 2009 at 6:09 pm |
  108. John, Fort Collins, CO

    When the time comes where it is necessary to take aggressive action I'm sure the Israelis will get the job done. As the stated target for any nuclear weapons developed by Iran they have the most to lose. When it comes to wars, the United States is already over committed.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:10 pm |
  109. Jim in Midwest

    Try stronger sanctions, hope for the moderation or overthrow of the Iranian regime, but prepare for military action.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:10 pm |
  110. Brian in Seattle

    Use of military force really ought to be done now via the world community (UN) before Israel inevitably feels the need to take matters into its own hands. Neither option is attractive, but the latter has far worse consequences for the region and the world.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:10 pm |
  111. Neville

    The time for tough sactions has long passed. If the country's who are at target to reap whatever intentions the Iranian quest for nuclear weapons are, these countries who are thought to have a reason to worry, should amp up the pressure on the permanent members of the UN. If this fail, maybe, an ultimatum on the same level as that of George W Bush might finally wake up the Ayatollahs who are really the power in Iran. The countrries who can really make a difference need to act and act with teeth that bites.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
  112. Joseph

    It's time for them to have a nuclear "accident" so that they'll learn to listen to what the world says.

    Joe in Delray Beach, FL

    December 14, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
  113. Silas - Boston

    Sooner or later we have to accept that we've created this Middle East mess by creating a bunch of Beverly Hillbillies in the desert sands. If we allow "Napoleo-dini-jihad" to use these students as a bargaining chip we might as well surrender now. If America had a viable alternative to oil, we would have the bargaining chip, Jack. Jimmy Carter warned us 30 years ago and we booted him out for telling us the truth. The hikers knew the risks of hiking in that part of the world, so no, Jack, I would not want the United States taking aggressive action without unequivocal U.N. support and funding..

    December 14, 2009 at 6:11 pm |
  114. Matt

    Yeah Jack, sure, cant wait to blow more money on a new war we can start but cannot finish.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:12 pm |
  115. Don Howard

    As you remember Jack, there was a time not all that many years ago when the same question was asked about Bin Laden. And we did nothing. Let's hope one day we don't look back and say, "You know, we had that Iranian President in our sights...right here in New York and did nothing. Wish we had."

    Don Howard
    Newtown, PA

    December 14, 2009 at 6:12 pm |
  116. Dennis

    Action against Iran?? For what? We have 3 wayward travelers who have crossed illegally into their country. Iran is threatened on all borders. We have them surrounded with troops in Iraq and troops in Afganistan. No wonder they want nuclear weapons.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  117. Lynn, Columbia, Mo.

    Sanctions really worked for N. Korea. We have enough on our plate. Let the rest of the world take care of it.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  118. Annie, Atlanta

    What, does Iran have oil too, because that didn't work out so well for us the last time?

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  119. Allie Cuttner

    Hey Jack. We definitely should not take offensive action agaisnt Iran. With wars in Iraq in Afghanistan already, we cannot occupy the Middle East. Besides, who are we to decide who is allowed to have nuclear weapons and who is not? If Israel has nuclear arms that they could use offensively against any Arab nation, why shouldn't Iran? America claims to be all about equality, but obviously not when it comes to different countries that we personally don't agree with.

    Allie C. Philadelphia, PA

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  120. Malcolm

    Yes, now is the time for America to take aggressive action against Iran.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  121. Scott Stodden

    Jack the question should be is it past time to take more agressive action against Iran cuz it is. The Iranians have done nothing but break all the rules regarding the sanctions that have already been placed against them, sometimes talking and sanctions are not enough the United States and the Obama administration need to take tougher action to show Iran that we are not playing with them anymore then maybe they'll wake up.

    Scott Stodden (Freeport,Illinois)

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  122. Ken in NC

    Jack, let's not give the warmongers of the Republican party any clues of where they can start another war to support our arms industry.

    Let Iran strike some place in the world and then the world forces would be justified in taking an eraser and removing Iran from the world map.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  123. katiec Pekin, IL

    Just what we need is another war, Jack.
    Since our attacking Iraq, the number of terrorists and terrorists groups
    have increased dramatically. It stemmed and increased hate and mistrust for our country. It has fueled countries such as Iran into unacceptable actions as they know they now have many radical followers. I don't know what the answer is except no to another war.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  124. Tony, FL

    Yes. We all hate war but Iran and N. Korea with there current governments are the greatest threat to the world. If we let them keep doing what they are doing we might live in a post nuclear world, if we survive.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  125. Student in canada

    This is absurd! How long does it take to figure out this cat and mouse game? They have intentions no doubt. A prevention? For Peace? That country hasn't been peaceful for a long time now. Look at the stuff going on in Tehran – too many tempered people. Definitely need to take action.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  126. Ali Galam

    The time to take action against Iran was years ago when Israel warned of Iran's nuclear weapons goal. What's really disturbing is that the US won't help Israel take action while sitting idly by as Iran gets the bomb. Better late than never may be too late for the millions of people that will die from the nuclear holocaust that Iran has in store for the middle east.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  127. Tobin from Ottawa (Canada)

    The time to take aggressive action against Iran occured a long time ago. Now they have prepared for a strike from either Israel or the U.S and have bettered their defences and ability to kill our soldiers...

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  128. Theodore R. Wade Jr.

    Yes, it is long past time to take action against Iran. But will the U.S.?
    Not very likely. Or to make myself quite clear, FAT CHANCE.
    The task will fall to Israel. Israel is the only country with the guts to execute the tough calls.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  129. TZ

    It's been action time for a few years now jack. Either that or Obama will have to give them something realy big. Here is the problem Obama is far to weak to go a thing about Iran. So in 2012 the American people will elect a president that can get us on track and not one that just looks good on tv.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:13 pm |
  130. Thomas Jutkowski

    If we don't. Maybe the Israili's will. They cannot be allowed to destroy the world.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  131. Peggy Desmarais

    No! This is not the time. All our troops are over-extended now, as well as our resources. Instead of sanctions or censure, bring the price of oil to $10.00 a barrell....that will cut off their money machine and bring their nuclear ambition to a screeching halt!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  132. Patrick Earlville, Illinois

    yes we should Iran's leader is completeley dishonest and is making those nukes we need to strike before they mass produce them and sell them to terrorists

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  133. A. Delaware

    And rush in like we did with Iraq? Maybe we should learn from the past and give the U.N. a chance. If we do take action it must be a global, united effort.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  134. pete reilly

    absolutely! cut off their gasoline supply and an internal revolt will take place in 60 days.they have to import virtually all of their gasoline and subsidize it.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  135. Chandler T., Rockaway, NJ

    The idea of taking "aggressive action" against Iran is utter nonsense, and the faster everybody admits that, the better. Can't anyone out there read a map? Iran can stop the tanker traffic through the Straight of Hormuz by throwing rocks. They don't even have to actually throw rocks, if they threaten to do so the insurance companies will stop the tankers.

    If you think the economy is a treat now, try cutting out a quarter of the world's oil supply.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  136. Calvin Hunter

    Yes Jack, we need to take aggressive action against Iran. It really doesn't matter why because we are the guardians of truth, justice, equality, fair play, everything good, and the slayers of evil dragons. How could you ask such a foolish question! Thanks for not answering your own question though.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  137. John

    So what do you want to do Jack...send in troops? Old guys like you and me will have to sign up as that's all we have left. Lets try diplomacy, sanctions, etc. for as long as we possibly can then let President Obama come up with another alternative...he's smarter than us anyway!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:14 pm |
  138. Albert K., Los Angeles

    Jack, remember Neda Soltan? She was shot to death at a rally in Tehran last June and it seemed the world press was dedicated to reporting the plight of the protesters. Such support is required to prempt a war with a revolution, but Michael Jackson's death took center stage a five days later. Now the protest build again but Tigar Woods is the top story. UN sanctions are worthless without strong support by the people of the world but our gossip comes first, so send in the Army.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
  139. John Brinker

    why does the only country ever to use nuclear weapons and which has a large stockpile (along with other countries who have lots of nukes) feel they can tell everyone else they can't have them. Not to worry, however, the Israelis will probably take care of the matter.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
  140. Caren in Illinois

    While I sympathize with the three Americans being held in Iran, we can not make policy decisions based on their plight. They were not soldiers, journalists or aid workers. They made a careless and naive choice, and will have to face the consequences of that choice. Who goes to Iraq on vacation? The US needs to be tough with Iran on nuclear weapons regardless of its effect on the American students.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
  141. Nancy from Tennessee

    Now is not the time to take aggressive action against Iran. We need to try all diplomatic avenues first. I wish the civilians of the United States would stop and think before they get themselves in a predicament that could cost all of America. If we do find that we need to take military actions, these hikers may find themselves in the middle of something more serious. What were they thinking?

    December 14, 2009 at 6:15 pm |
  142. Joe in VA

    Anyone who doubts that Iran will soon get the bomb has their head in the sand. Given that, the window for any action is rapidly closing. However, I don't believe we have the capacity to prevent them from acquiring nukes, the genie is out of the bottle. A military strike would unite their divided populace , as well as much of the Muslim would, despite the fact the Saudi's and others are secretly cheering for such action. Our best, but slim, hope is some good CIA work to bring about a change power in Iran with the moderates. Make a note, as soon as Iran has the bomb, the Saudis and other non Sunni nations will be seeking one. There are no good choices. It's too late.

    Chatham, VA

    December 14, 2009 at 6:16 pm |
  143. Ralph Spyer chicago Il

    We can not afford the two wars we are in now.The only Americans that want war against Iran are Americans Jews who want us to fight their wars., and the big oil business to steal their oil.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:16 pm |
  144. Jonathan

    Isn't aggressive actions what caused Iran to become like this in the first place? In 1953 America overthrew the democratically elected leader of Iran and replaced him with a dictator known as the Shah (Operation Ajax). Perhaps our aggression will simply cause more problems for us as it has in the past.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:16 pm |
  145. Rodney B

    Aggressive Action?? REALLY? So you're suggesting that Amercia should get involved in 3 wars?I don't think the US can "afford" to be tough, right now.
    The best bet against Iran is its young population. A lot of them are not interested in Nuclear bombs and Israel as a threat, they are more rational in their thinking and more progressive in their outlook.
    America acting too aggressively against Iran will stir a beehive in that area that would just give the US a bit too much that it can fir on its already crowded plate.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:16 pm |
  146. Eric from Ft. Lauderdale, FL

    Yes Jack but we can't afford it. Lets face it, we are over extended in every imaginable way. This is what happens when you live and operate way out of your means while in the the house (USA), we cant get along, we cant manage money, and we are out of work. We have had it good for way to long, and now that we need arsenal to act against the real threats from Iran, how can we? We blew it..lets just be blunt and call it like it is.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:16 pm |
  147. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    It's time to stop using the words "agressive action" against Iran, we've been saying that for the past 8 years and we get the same results from Iran. It's time to wipe them off the earth.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:17 pm |
  148. Bob F. in VA


    Are you seriously hinting at the aggressive action I think you are? Would that include stealth bombers, cruise missiles, special ops teams and the like? You do realize where that would lead, don't you? Iran could close the Straits of Hormuz for weeks, perhaps months. Did you like $4 gas last year? Wait until it hits $8 or $9. We won't be talking recession here in the USA, but full blown depression.

    I pray to whatever gods there may be to come up with another plan.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:17 pm |
  149. James Wall

    Iran: No worthless sanctions. tell them publicly we are aiming 4 ICBM H-bombs at them. They fire a nuke and we burn their country to the groand.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:17 pm |
  150. Dan

    A little aggressive action now or a lot more later, we will probably be wishing again that we had done more to stop the inevitable, these dictators are absolutely bent sticking there chest out. How much longer do we have to put up with this BS.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  151. Heath Hensley

    When President Obama said in his speech that the USA would be a beacon of freedom, its time to put that to the true test! Iranian citizens are begging for freedom, we should help them and stop these crazy guys with nukes now! When oppressed people beg for our help, we should be true to our roots and help them.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  152. William Courtland

    First ask: who has the real moral ground: it matters just as much as who is in possession of the high ground.

    Next: cause and effect: the ressession is still in action: unless you know of something which has revitalized the market the way the computer or the industrial revolution did? the atomic age, space flight,..., In the last twenty years was has been the most signifigant economic or innovative change? Minaturization? Really what has been invented in the past say thirty years even that was not already in existance? Handheld gaming systems: and what is gross benefit to humanity in that invention... sure it is entertaining... Computer code, computer code has been around since the first computers back near the turn of the nineteenth century... You have not invented or release anything which justifies a new market: so under threat you think you can start a war with Iran in hope of weakening them so to command dominance over their oil... seems like yet another manipulative plot against the future to me... some more idiots stuck in a paradox using a psychic reflection of their own evil to deterimine the outcome of event... this is the definition of criminal insanity: belief in prophecy forged to witness their own evil intent.

    Making Iran a Warzone: this is Profitable, an inhumane profit indeed, but greed knows no moral bound.

    A United State Postal Service in mass effect, passing through Iran and delivering all the electrical potential any nation could need via treaty controlled nuclear power generation stations for that rail system and the surrounding residence and industries that are found connected with that rail system; this seems like a real solution to both oil and nuclear poliferation, a global first point of market equality which eliminates the theaters which spawn terrorist... yet what of the manipulative horrorists which start these ideas?

    Murder is wrong: thou shall not kill: when killing is without intent of conscience function. Prison should be a scary idea, the police on patrol is a police state found abhorred, we should live in a world where you can leave your door unlocked and it should not matter if you left your lunch at a friends because nutrition is the first line of health care, thus the public option must work to keep everyone healthy instead of just treating the symptoms of death.

    People at work have reason to live.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  153. jack

    Amazing war-mongering, Jack. Purported e-mails without a date?! Where are they from? Who seems to want to go to war with Iran? Will the US be proxy to other nuclear powers? Sounds like a set-up to me. Rembember the Tonkin Gulf? Remember those Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq??!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  154. Donald

    Jack, You talk alot of nonsense. What action do you want the Country to take ? It seems to me you have more info on the story then the rest of us. Let me remind you, Iran is not Afghanistan or Iraq. MIlitary action especially from the air (destroying their facilities) will cause a chain reaction in which the whole world will be at arms.

    Let us be at Peace.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  155. Norm

    Jack , your last comment makes me feel like you are again saying we should continue to be the world Cop . While everyone else sits back stage, and supply less than a third of any action in blood and money , and get little or no critisism while they sit back , I think it high time to let the Europeans stop wining and moaning and start taking actions suitable to the offences they feel they are taking . We are broke , NO more world Cop , and I'll bet there aren't many who don't feel this way here in U.S. Enough already .

    December 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  156. Jim McDade

    Aggressive military action against Iran might only galvanize Iranian public against the United States. Modern democracy is not a system that we can impose on other nations. Let the Iranian people stand up to their oppressors on their own. Liberty and freedom must be earned, as it was here in the USA back in 1776. The price paid will be bloodshed and hardship, but it is up to the Iranians to bring on change that will help them avoid a devastating confrontation with more democratic nations if the Iranian despots unleash nuclear weapons.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
  157. Elly Terry

    No I don't think this is the right time. Despite the threat of a nuclear attack, let the US wait for the sake of the lives of the US civilians that are awaiting trail for transpassing. Also why is it that the US has to be the one to aggressively invade other countries for the sake of that country's citizens? For once let another country take initiative in being the one to invade Iran first. We have more issues to take care of at home.
    Fort Mill SC

    December 14, 2009 at 6:19 pm |
  158. Curtis Kentucky

    Yes Jack! If we let this go to far Israel is going to strike, and know one wants that.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:19 pm |
  159. Cris Jackson

    Bomb them...

    December 14, 2009 at 6:19 pm |
  160. Bill in VA

    I hate to say it but it is past due.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
  161. Mason Bliss

    I'm an Infantryman in the US Army, so when I say this I say it because I am willing to take a stand against the brutal regime of Iran, personally. Iran must stop their actions immediately. Any such talk of using triggers for nuclear bombs as "peaceful" should be treated as the nonsense it is.
    The UN will never find anything or solve anything. It's time that the US acted on its own and tell Iran up front that if they do not end their nuclear ambitions, they will pay dearly. And mean it, too.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
  162. Gary - Woodhaven, Michigan

    Two countries in the Mideast have developed plans to change the oil market and exports from U.S. dollars to Euros giving strong competition to the NYMEX and London's IPE. Saddam Hussein in 2000, and Iraq in 2006.

    The encroachment on the U.S. dollar supremacy and what that would do to our national debt is staggering.

    Funny isn't it how the planning by these countries and our rhetoric and action seems to coincide.

    The only aggression that should be done is to sit their arses down and negotiate the real reasons behind the antagonistic actions on both sides.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
  163. randy seattle

    Iran is the least of our concerns. They appear to be self- destructing from the inside out. Perhaps what the Iranian people are doing will eventually lead to a "Tehran tea party". Our domestic situation is so dire right now. Do we really have the resources to deal with them? Can we put more importance on the men and women who cry themselves to sleep each night because they can't feed their children or pay their bills.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
  164. Jay from Chicago

    Just stay out of the way of Israel, and they will do what's necessary.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
  165. June

    I just can't believe the level of anti-Israel hate in this blog. What is this country coming to? Don't tell me it's ok now to have a 2nd hollocaust. Typical liberals full of hate!!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
  166. Craig Koller, Wisconsin

    Jack, when the United States stepped into Iranian affairs for the British in the 1950's we put a brutal dictator into power. After twenty five years of holding power, the people over threw him for an Islamic leader named Khomeini. This leader presented himself as being more of a moderate leader then he actually was. Khomeini brought a very extreme religious government to Iran. We continue to see this government today, but the Iranian people apparently have had enough. We can see the turmoil in the streets of Iran. I say, let the Iranian's take care of themselves. With two foreign wars, we have many of our own problems to manage, without putting our noses in the interests of another nation. I say let the pre-established safeguards in place take care of it, i.e., the United Nations.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
  167. OneAvgDude

    Hell no! Are you sure this is not a campaign aganist Islam? When Americas immediate neighbor was about to aquire nuclear warheads it was a crisis, but we want Iran to stop their nuclear program while their immediate neighbor holds strong with their own...why don't we push all Middle East countries to eliminate all nuclear stock and production, then maybe we may get closer to a more stable and progressive approach for compromise. Oh I forgot we're still supplying Isreal with weapons...and you wonder why they view us as the enemy solicitor???

    December 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
  168. katiec Pekin, IL

    Thank God McCain is not in office.
    With McCains, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran attitiude we would already
    be involved in three wars. But, imagine Afghanistan, the only
    acceptable war, would be put on the back burner again.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
  169. Samuel

    Yes! We have enough evidence to justify it, we have the support of the citizens to do it, and we have the moral obligation to take these dictators from power. I say this as an Obama supporter, knowing that most likely we will not see it.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:21 pm |
  170. Rob Masters

    No, action against Iran right now would be foolish and premature. The increasing civil unrest there is a very positive sign that Iranian citizens want an end to the current regime. Give them the chance to get rid of Ahmadinejad and the Revolutionary Guard, and the nuclear weapons program would be effectively dismantled. Doesn't anyone remember the Iranian revolution during 1979-1980? America should, because that's when we got kicked out of Iran and it became a theocracy. Support the revolt of the Iranian citizens and give them a chance to clean up their own house.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:22 pm |
  171. Dashan

    Of course it's time to take aggressive action against Iran. Just like it's time to send more troops to the middle eastern area when the ambiguity of our financial system solely relies on how we feel about other nations having a "representative democracy". We have six months to mind our own business and six months to stay out of other peoples businesses. Our Civil War was ignored by other countries when we were younger. How come we have become the police of the world, Jack?

    December 14, 2009 at 6:22 pm |
  172. PeterJ from Maryland

    If I were commander-in-chief, I'd instruct the Air Force to fly a mission in broad daylight over downtown Tehran. It's time to send a Ronald Reagan style message to this illegitimate regime.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:23 pm |
  173. cecil Keeping

    Well we could say to Iran welcome to the nuclear club. It however comes with the responsibility of never using it . If you ever remotely threaton a neighbour we will explode a can of sunshine over every one of your major cities and you can return to the stone age have a nice day!.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:23 pm |
  174. Gordon

    Sure Jack..you lead the way and become a war correspondent. Tell me how its going when you get there

    December 14, 2009 at 6:23 pm |
  175. michael armstrong sr. TX.

    I dont think were going to have a choice but to take aggression now because Israel don't have as much patience as Carter or Obama .

    December 14, 2009 at 6:23 pm |
  176. Terry from Illinois

    America can't do 3 wars at once so let other nations take lead on Iran !!!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:23 pm |
  177. Kevin

    At this point we have them surrounded, iraq, afghan, and the sea. If I were them I would be scared too and trying to find ways to protect myself. Do I thnnk we need to attack them, drive up gasoline costs, ignite god knows how many extremists and watch families get destroyed by an inevitable draft? no way. Keep them surrounded and utlilize cripplng sanctions.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
  178. Mike in Mmephis

    Let Israel protect Israel, they don't screw around. If that little statesman wannabe in Iran wants to pick a fight, I'll be happy to sit back and watch. Israel will punch him in the face, and it's long overdue. And if oil prices skyrocket, good. It will help prod us into getting off our lazy asses and go green.

    We have no business picking another fight halfway around the world. If Iran's neighbors are scared, let them do something about it. And if they aren't then we shouldn't be.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
  179. Mike from Baltimore

    No, Sanctions can only hurt the ordinary citizens not the government besides the radicals in Iran can justify going full force in building the bomb.....negotiation is the only way to go.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
  180. EugeneWiese

    If federal workers make more than private sector workers,then,I say so be it. This used to be the arguement between union workers and scientists,when I had a day job 20 years ago. What are you going to do about it ? quit your job because you probably are not happy with it. Gene

    December 14, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
  181. michel

    Most people resent America for trying to police the world. Even if Iran produces nuclear weapons they wont be able to reach the US so lets mind our own business until the world starts clamoring for America's help again.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
  182. Luci - Pekin, IL.

    No No No, we are already too deep in wars that Bush and Cheney got us into. No more Repubs in office, they are the war party.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:25 pm |
  183. Steven Monash

    When will you people stop messing around with these guys? U.S. administration must support pro-democracy movement in Iran and help remove this fanciest regime from power. Imagine the middle east without those morons. Oh, Make sure to thank Jimmy Carter for installing them down there.
    Steven Monash, Ph.D.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:25 pm |
  184. lstro

    I believe it's time to enact the strongest sanctions possible even if it means totally stopping all imports. If this does not work they will soon have to decide between peace and total destruction.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:25 pm |
  185. Nick from Vancouver British Columbia Canada

    Absolutely not Jack. The United States , after 8 years, is still fighting in a country they thought had " weapons of mass distruction"

    This time it has to be proven without a shadow of a doubt! Real undeniable evidence, obtained by whatever means necessary! ( like going in and kidnapping one of their top guys and making them talk) Once the US has that, they need to have other powerful countries like China, Russia and any other country that's capable of committing equal amounts of resources as the US, go in that country with full military might, and not stop until everything is flattened! Short of that it's a waste of time!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:26 pm |
  186. lynne from north carolina

    Exactly how would we take aggressive action and with what and whom?

    The reason Tehran is stepping up everything is because they know that the US and its allies can't do a thing unless they institute the draft. Talk about the chaos that would bring.

    Our military is stretched thin. We Americans are weary of war and the costs of it because we desperately need that money here at home for our own problems.

    So because of the previous administration's meddling in Iraq and spending like there is no tomorrow, we have only threats of sanctions and diplomacy to work with concerning Iran. Boy didn't we bite ourselves in the behind with this nation building logic.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:27 pm |
  187. Nelson Oliveira, Tallahassee

    Yes, It's time to destroy the Iranian dictatorship government. Some people say Americans can not afford a third war and I say Americans and the rest of the world can not afford another country going nuke either.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:27 pm |
  188. Frank P

    I say lets kick the tires and light the fires. Time to make Iran an example.....no troops, no Tanks, none of that.....stictly an air war. We'll show em how to build a REAL bomb. I am sick of these clowns trying to embarass us because they think we are too scared or broke to take them on.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:27 pm |
  189. Jim Miller

    We have gotten tough with Iran. I heard President Obama using some very harsh words condemning Iran's nuclear ambitions.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:27 pm |
  190. Curtis in Kentucky

    Action in the for of air-strikes only. Invasion would be crazy. Only the Iranian people can change their government. An invasion would also mean a draft.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:27 pm |
  191. kenny williams

    The Iranian government should be overthrown militarily
    But not without the European powers being involved
    If they include their troops then it should be done,
    but we should not go it alone.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
  192. Pete Bryan

    I think that war should always be a last resort. It means putting people, probably our troops, in harms way. But at the same time, if Iran announces to the world that they are a nuke power...bomb em' back to the stone age. A nuclear armed Iran is bad news for all of us, because if they get a nuke bomb, sooner or later thay will use it.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
  193. coffeetime

    It's not just time to take action against Iran, it is long overdue. Our national security under the current and past administrations has been snoozing while Iran's alarm clock has been ringing away on the nightstand. As is typical, we find it more palatable to let danger get up right to our door than to do something about it in the early stages when it would've been much easier to confront. Once it became painfully aware that Iran was behind the IED's that were killing our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, we should have been non-stop aerial bombing of Iran's military and infrastructure – send it back to the stone age where it's rulers seem to want the rest of the world to go.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
  194. Tom

    The worst thing the US or Israel could do now is to take aggressive action against Iran. It would make the civil unrest there cease immediately, and make the cleric dictators safe. The US needs to take subversive action to support the civil protests in Iran and overthrow the regime through its own people.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
  195. Kenny, in Missouri

    We have not been fighting the real enemy in the middle east....The Iranians have abd are still funding the terrorism and weapons used in Iraq.
    The bulk of the soldiers we are fighting in Iraq are crossing over from Iran and are supplied and trained there for that mission....
    America has dropped the ball...we have became yuppy do gooders who rebuild a war zone after a fight and mostlymake idle threats that no one there respects....
    .Harry Truman k new how to let the enemy we meant bussiness.... the mideast terrorists will never give up their terrorism efforts unrtill they reieve a suprise like Nagasaki Japan did

    December 14, 2009 at 6:29 pm |
  196. harry

    Jack -

    It's time to be clear with Iran that the U.S. is opposed to WMDs of all kinds in the middle east and that we are fully committed to the defense of Israel. We should also remind Iran that their country is surrounded by U.S. troops and remind NATO that, as GWB would say, "your are either with us or against us!" There's a time to talk and now it"s time to stand up!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:29 pm |
  197. Don

    Jack – It is way past time to get Iran to the table as tell it like it could be, either come out of their shell or we bomb their oil wells. Our friends in the Mid-East will have to choose which is better for them. We should take a vote of the states around them and to hell with the rest of the world.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:29 pm |
  198. charles

    re: Iran, were too late. Politicaly, Obama could never get GOP support.
    This Nuclier threat is 3 times more serious than the Cuba/Russia
    crisis .

    December 14, 2009 at 6:30 pm |
  199. Mike

    Jack, I was in Afghanistan and watched our drones taking off each day from KAF with missiles searching for insurgents then delivering their payload. What if we arm some of those drones with the "right stuff" and send them to the west to strategic targets in Iran much like sixty years ago in Japan. I think the back and forth on this issue would be over once and for all.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:30 pm |
  200. Frankie

    More aggressive diplomacy yes, but behind the scenes. We need our European allies to step up on this one and carry the banner (as England and France seem to be doing now). We also need to work behind the scenes to drive support for sanctions from the rest of the middle east. Any armed conflict in Iran would be deviating to oil, tourism, and other trade within the region, so everyone in the region has a stake in a peaceful resolution that ensure Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons.

    If Iran obtains nuclear weapons, other nations in the region will feel forced to do the same or else we will be forced to further extend our nuclear umbrella to protect them.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:30 pm |
  201. Craig Koller, Wisconsin

    How can we attack a nation do to illegitimate elections, when the elections we supported in Afghanistan were equally if not more corrupt. In a nation we control! That is absurd. Even then, what about the 2000 elections. When a presidential candidate won the popular vote, but was not elected because of the failure of our electoral college! Where is the outrage at our own system? Please, we have much more pressing matters then the corruption of another nation.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:32 pm |
  202. Parissa

    Don't you have other things to do? What does US to do in middle east thousands of miles away? These reports are just lies with sources never mentioned and it is the media propaganda! Stay at home and if you are in invasion mood you can invade Canada to take control of north passage way.

    Iran is busy taking care of her nation and problems. Invade US congress and topple the representative of big companies and rich people who are fighting against a public health option and play with some naive people's emotions to reach their goals.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:32 pm |
  203. gord ontario

    let the iranian people deside the fate of there own country,they did it once they can do it again the middle east is a big mess now,wars cost money money the us does not have,they get the bomb 20 minutes after launch they would not exsist

    December 14, 2009 at 6:32 pm |
  204. Tyran

    The fact that you cannot say attack them, Jack, is just more proof that a military soultion is wrong when dealing with Iran.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:33 pm |
  205. M. Kaye

    The time to have taken aggressive action against Iran was during the gulf war, when they were weakened significantly from their 8 year war with Iran, and, were extremely vulnerable to the multi-national ground force of 450,000 troops and air power support from the coalition. Any pretext should have been used at that time. They were always the bigger threat to the region than Iraq. It's a pity that the U.S. and it's allies missed the boat and this window of opportunity...in spite of repeated warnings from major think tanks and strategists – and in warnings from Israel.

    At this point in time, obviously a regime change is a must but will and can only be achieved militarily. Because they missed the boat on Iran it will be extremely costly in terms of lives, military resources, political capitol for the U.S. and its allies, increased terrorism activity, heightened instability in the Middle East, and an upward spike in the cost of oil when they attempt to block off the Straight of Hormuz. .. to name but a few consequences of all this inaction..not to mention giving them time to beef things up militarily on their end. The element of any surprise attacks is out the window as well.

    To not act against Iran militarily NOW, in spite of the costs, is to assure Armaggedon in 2-3 years (or sooner) – which Iran is clearly toiling to achieve.

    Perhaps some day the U.S. will conduct its foreign policy looking at the bigger geopolitical picture and look ahead say 15-30 years instead of the usual 3-5 when it calculates what it takes to bring its unique brand stability??? to regions.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:33 pm |
  206. Mike from Denver

    Just how many countries are we willing to take over and rebuild at one time?

    December 14, 2009 at 6:33 pm |
  207. Stewart in OR

    Now, Now, Jack. Pretty easy for all of us to sit back and say we are mad and we're not going to take it any more.....and send someone else's son or daughter to be killed or maimed......only to find out it was another ruse just like Saddam's by Iran's leadership showing "strength".

    December 14, 2009 at 6:33 pm |
  208. Joe

    Sanctions should be placed on Iran immediatly, not wait till the end of December. Mayby then the Iranian populuce will rise-up and revolt against their renegade government. Oh! they're revolting already? Well let the sanctions begin. And be the straw that breaks the "Camels' Back".

    December 14, 2009 at 6:36 pm |
  209. jim Blevins

    We need to stop trying to control every aspect of other countries and solve our own problems. The basic IAEA treaty provides adequate protection. Should that not work, MAD certainly will. We are destroying this country trying to control the whole rest of the world. Meanwhile, China, which minds its own business, is slowly getting to own this country.

    Jim, Craig, CO

    December 14, 2009 at 6:36 pm |
  210. Parissa

    Don't you have other things to do? What does US have to do in the middle east thousands of miles away? These reports are just lies with sources never revealed and it is just the media propaganda! Stay at home and if you are in invasion mood you can invade Canada to take control of north passage way.

    Iran is busy taking care of her nation and problems. Invade US congress and topple the representative of big companies and rich people who are fighting against a public health option and play with some naive people's emotions to reach their goals.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:36 pm |
  211. Doug

    The threat from Iran is real and action to eliminate that threat is long over due. The longer we wait to deal with the threat, the harder it will be to deal with. It doesn't mean we have to go to war with Iran, it just means we have to eliminate the threat with precision bombing. The US seems to lack the political will anymore. The way things are going, waiting as we are, we will end up negotiating with Iran vs dictating terms that need to be set. Did someone say that a nuclear Iran was unacceptable? That sentiment seems to be fading.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:36 pm |
  212. Rob G

    It doesn't matter what we think. The government will display all the negative and threatening material about Iran that it feels is necessary to justify starting a war.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:37 pm |
  213. greg

    How much evidence is needed before the US takes credible action? If the US government, and other nations continue to stand by while Iran urinates down our backs, we will only take the threat seriously when they drop a nuclear devise in Isreal or set it off in a parked car in front of the whitehouse. Have we not learned anything about where there is smoke there is fire?

    Greg in Canada

    December 14, 2009 at 6:38 pm |
  214. GWTripp, Mch'sburg, PA

    Yes, we must talk softly and carry a big stick. It is unwise to take action alone. China and Russia have economic ties with Iran. They need to get over their “its only business” attitude and join with us in our efforts to curb Iran’s nuclear program. In the end, we must let the Iranian government clearly understand that the U.S. will use force if necessary. Set a date for compliance, if they don’t then it is time to put up or shut up. That means surgical air strikes on all nuclear facilities. Israel is considering this very same thing. As Patton would say, it takes a lot of guts.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:38 pm |
  215. Pat O'Connor

    Iran wants nukes to intimidate or bluff Israel. The U.S. is out of range, we can defend ourselves, and Iran is not stupid enough to send them our way. Therefore, the decision should be Israels. If Israel can't bear an Iranian nuclear scenario, it is their decision whether or not to preemptively take out the nuclear capability. We should support them in whatever their decision is. That is justified based on Iran's decision to ignore the U.N. Sanctions are a joke unless we institute an effective blockade, which cannot be achieved without FULL support from Russia and China. That will never happen and will only allow Iran time to complete their nuclear weapons program. Israel needs to be given the green light to decide.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:38 pm |
  216. Lynn, Columbia, Mo.

    Why is it that old rich men send young not so rich men to fight and die or get wounded for other people's interests? Teach your children that war is for other people's power, not theirs.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
  217. Chris Walker

    For crying out loud, Jack, we have got to stop being the policemen of the world! "Aggressive action" did not prove beneficial in Iraq, and it wouldn't in Iran, either.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
  218. Jeff, Tennessee

    Was anyone actually surprised by this? This ball was dropped so long ago that the game might already be over. We'll have to wait and see.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
  219. DeWitt Stone

    Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.............Iran? Peter, Paul, and Mary said it best: "WHEN will they ever learn, when will they EVER learn."

    December 14, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
  220. chris

    Obviously the many sanction that has been imposed on Iran by the U.S. has fallen on deft ears because other countries are, specifically China, has a hard time following through with the sanction rules by the U.N. Its a lot like a couple tring to raise a child, one grounds and the other allows disobediences. Sooooo, since sanctions failed to due to a lack of firm cooperation with other contries, we need to rally to troops.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
  221. Rev. Dr. Dale Robison

    Jack, I like yoou. Your are one of the more percepticive and hard-assed commentarors around.

    My conclusions about Iraq are: 1) Let Russia and China wrorry about it. Both have Islamic people of their own to worry about and
    they should.

    But an Israeli strike? God forbid. They got enough enemies around them already.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
  222. Danram

    Time? It's past time.

    Yes, taking military action against Iran to prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons will be very, very messy, But the alternative ... allowing them to develop those weapons .... is 1,000 times worse.

    Toppling Iran's thuggish theocracy would solve a LOT of problems elsewhere in the world. It bears repeating that they are, by far, the principal financiers and enablers of terrorist organizations worldwide.

    Truth be told, I really don't think it would be that hard. 2/3 of Iran's population would just as hang the mullahs themselves if they could.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:40 pm |
  223. Cecelia

    yes... it is time, do not play with them.. if they send a bomb in any direction, the whole world will suffer the fall out.. They have proved they do not want to work with the rest of the world.. the people do, and I feel sorry for them.. but the leadership must go.. maybe an inside job?

    December 14, 2009 at 6:40 pm |
  224. Dave in Portland

    Jack –

    Taking the U.S. military into Iran would be mistake. So would increased sanctions. The Iranian people are already up in arms against it's government. Let's stay a positive example to them instead of becoming a common enemy.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:40 pm |
  225. Larry from Texas

    No, of course not. The time to take aggressive action was ten years ago. Now we're dealing with a powerful nation that will not accept defeat. For all we know Iran already has some sort of nuclear weapons. since we waited so long hoping for a peace that would never come, we now have to look for a diplomatic solution. If that doesn't work, then here comes Iraq No. 2.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:40 pm |
  226. Buzz

    Let them build their weapons while we finish our laser star satilite missle killers. Station them over Iran and just shoot just like our un manned aircraft do now in Afganistan. And sell to other countries our interceptors. Then if they don't listen demolish them.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:40 pm |
  227. Tyler in LA

    Well said William Joseph in LA. I couldn't agree with you more.

    As for the hikers, they made their own bed. If you don't want to fall in the Grand Canyon, don't go to Arizona. If you don't want to be imprisoned in a hostile country – DON'T HIKE THERE. We should not allow them to be used as pawns...innocent or not, they are guilty of being stupid.

    In regards to action, the combination of sanctions and supporting of revolution from within Iran should be our push. We don't have the money or the stomach for another fight right now, and the moment we bomb Iran, we risk turning their own Western-loving citizens into pro-Ayatollah enemies. The only military action, if any, should come from NATO/UN or Israel. But both of those risks the latter as well.

    My guess is there is much going on that we don't know about (and should not know about) and time will reveal all.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:41 pm |
  228. Mike in Quebec

    Whoa now you crusaders.....remember the last stupid decision and what that has caused to your economy. Give it a rest will ya! It's amazing how the US seems to forget it's biggest mistakes. Now you want to pick a fight with the other side of the strait or Hormuz? Why...come on now just say it! You want to CONTROL oil! Why lie?

    I guess by lying you can a tleast pull the wool over 50% of the population. You know the stupid ones.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:42 pm |
  229. Gordo, NJ

    Any country that is hostile to the US and our allies should be put on notice that they are our nuclear target list. We have thousands of nukes and the US should announce half our list. Then some people in Iran will have a 100 percent guarantee they will be destroyed if Iran shows it is about to cross the line.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:42 pm |
  230. Luci - Pekin, IL.

    No, we are already in 2 wars that the Republicans got us in. If they get in office again we'll be in a war in Iraq, afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and who knows where else. We don't need anymore wars, we are not the World Police Force.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:44 pm |
  231. Dyermoe

    We shouldn't go to war over questionable inteligence. We made that mistake once before, and look where it got us. Deeply in debt and the scourge of all muslim nations. Iran is like an immature rebelious teenager. We should sit down with them and hear their grievances and negotiate some peace in the region. It's also time to stop standing behind Isreal when they thumb their noses at our suggestions and help for Israeli/Palestinian peace. Israel needs to get out of Palestine.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:45 pm |
  232. V N

    Can we afford it ? It is time take action against Pakistan, that is where the all the trouble in the world is. if we can control them, rest will follow the suite.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:45 pm |
  233. Jim

    Try getting tough with Israel first.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:46 pm |
  234. Tom, Long Beach, California

    That time passed long ago......do we have to wait for them to blow up a major city to do something? Don't this little pimple of a country do what they are doing.....even their own people hate their leaders

    Stewart, don't be clueless

    December 14, 2009 at 6:46 pm |
  235. Aaron

    Absolutely Not! We cannot afford it. After 10 years of wars that the Republicans got us into already, another one will kill us faster than we could kill the Iranians. The best thing we can do is "talk tough" publicly, like what Clinton and Obama are already doing while subversively assisting the political dissidents in Iran already. Think about Iran has already accused us several times for assisting the dissidents, but nothing has come of it. They haven't rallied any support in the world community (except for Chavez), they haven't been able to quiet their citizens, and none of their neighbors want to deal with them extensively. Face it, they have cried wolf about America so many times that if it were true that we were to help the dissidents no one would believe them. It would be perfect and the best part, NO MORE AMERICANS HAVE TO DIE IN POINTLESS WAR! Amazing!?

    December 14, 2009 at 6:47 pm |
  236. Kathleen

    Define aggressive. Aggressive doesn't have to mean sending in the troops. Negotations can be aggressive. Sanctions can be aggressive. Supporting opponents to the current government can be aggressive. Zero tolerance for certain activities can be aggressive.

    We need to be creative, as troops on the ground is not a one-size-fits-all course of action. It's about leverage: what would hurt the Iranian government? How would standing with us benefit not only our friends but also our adversaries who see Iran as a threat? We don't need to pick a fight with Iran, and we shouldn't. If there is to be a fight, let them start it and then suffer the consequences of a united American people.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:47 pm |
  237. Dex, Houston TX

    Jack, Jack, Jack....
    "Aggressive Action!" You're beginning to sound like George W. Bush! Besides, Russia should pressure Iran to comply with internatinal demands! We have enough on our plate at the moment!

    Houston TX

    December 14, 2009 at 6:47 pm |
  238. Steven Foyer

    You mean like the CIA did in 1953, when it overthrew the democratically elected President Mossadeq of Iran and installed the Shah ? That went down pretty well, didn't it ? But of course, our remembrance of history starts from 1979, right ? Lets look at words versus deeds. How many countries have Iran invaded ? None in the past 100 years at least.
    You are relying on some report whose voracity has been confirmed ? Forgot about Iraq now ?
    Iran has signed the NPT (Nuclear Non proliferation Treaty). Anybody read the NPT ? What does it say in Article 4 ? Basically it says the signatory can Enrich Uranium for Civilan Nuclear Energy purposes. The US (with the UN) wants to take away that right for Iran. As an analogy, you can pump oil, but you have to rely on others to refine it for you. You can not set up your own refinery. So, a country which wants to be independent on fuel has to rely on others to enrich it for them ? Why not start the discussion on who decides if a country is trustworthy enough to follow the NPT (and not negate a right it signed up for) - the unelected few in the UN security council or the General Assembly ?
    Besides, can we afford it ? The last two wars were expensive lessons...

    December 14, 2009 at 6:48 pm |
  239. Jane Bobsky

    What exactly can the US really do, given that it is de facto bankrupt and its military is basically exhausted and bogged down?

    Invade Iran?

    Nuke it?

    Let Israel take their facilities out and then watch the middle east go up in flames (oil at $300)

    December 14, 2009 at 6:48 pm |
  240. Matt


    the biggest issue with taking "agressive action" is that we'd have to go solo. And we know how much the dem's in congress love us acting alone or even with a small coalition.

    We have to face facts, Russia and China won't allow crippling sanctions, and if he have crippling sanctions we're going to end up with Iran taking military action against the Persian gulf. So either way we end up taking miliatary action. It's up to the politicians whether they want an arms race in the Middle East, or a disgruntled international community.


    December 14, 2009 at 6:49 pm |
  241. Calvin Hunter

    Such foolisness.....the blind leading the blind. Keep up the good work Jack.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:50 pm |
  242. Jack Noll

    I think, since Iran so desperately wants a nuclear bomb, we should skip the sanctions and give them want they want......From about 40,000 feet above them!!

    December 14, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
  243. Tyler in LA

    RE: Charles – re: Iran, were too late. Politicaly, Obama could never get GOP support. This Nuclier threat is 3 times more serious than the Cuba/Russia crisis .

    ARE YOU SERIOUS??????? That is easily the most ridiculous statement I've ever read in any of these threads. Seriously, you should go read a book on this subject. I'm sure they have some with big pictures and small words for you somewhere.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
  244. Jerry Annunziato

    when did jack start working for aipac–remember them? the folks– wolfowfitz, pearl, blitzard (former employee of jerusalem post, et al– who gave us irag? shame, jack. i thought you were an american copncerned with american issues. but i guess even curdmodgeons have a price.

    and now the senator from israel, lieberman, want s to stop health care–even though americans pay for israelis universal health care–single payer–the US

    December 14, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
  245. Alex Gomez

    At the minimum, we owe it to our allies and the people of Iran to proceed a surgical tactical strike on the material production sites, which are known. Additionally, Obama would be well advised to throw some moral support behind the protesters.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
  246. Carl from Oklahoma

    For those of you saying don't do anything, they are no different than countless other countries with nuclear ambitions. How many of those other countries have announced their intentions like Iran has? How many of those other countries have been proved to be funding our enemies? How many of them have had staged conferences to announce the holocaust never happened. These are not rational people here, we will have to deal with them eventually. The time has come.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
  247. Conoclast

    What about a surgical drone strike? Or some land-based skullduggery; can't we call on those hypertrained special forces thugs?
    Seems like if we could set their R&D back a few years the time would bbe worth buying.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:52 pm |
  248. mehran

    All U.S. need to do is to give the OK to Israel and problem would be solved.....

    December 14, 2009 at 6:52 pm |
  249. Minesh

    The aggressive action needed is to tacitly support Israel in taking out Iran's nuke facilities. Anything less than that will be a grave threat for the US, Israel and the world.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:54 pm |
  250. James

    The reason why Iran can't have nukes is because they are theocratic government. You can't have stupid religious people in possession of nukes. Another reason why is because Hezbollah, an ally of Iran, has a slogan of a mushroom cloud over Israel. Iran clearly wants the nukes just so it can blow up Israel.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:55 pm |
  251. Ky

    Jack, I think the question we need to ask is what will be the consequences if no one acts? It appears to me that the U.N. does nothing but talk until it is too late, so maybe we need to consider the option of force. Oh, by the way, I'm a doctor in the navy so this would mean putting my own life on the line and I think it would likely be worth it.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:55 pm |
  252. Brad - Denver

    We're in the wrong country. We shouldn't be fighting in Afghanistan where we can't change conditions there. Instead, we should be destroying Iran's nuclear capability. Wrong war at the wrong place.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:55 pm |
  253. Sue Callahan

    No , not yet.

    I think that the younger generation there is going to rise up and put a stop to this. Though most discount scripture, it's clear their own hand will be against them. Going against them, is that the youth want a better world..and that inspiration can't be quelled...it's like water..and bubbles to the top.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:56 pm |
  254. B

    Obviously the people in Iran seem to think there is big trouble coming their way since they are protesting so fiercely. They realize time is not on their side. They need a government over-haul, kinda like what we need in our congress and senate. I think someone better do something, like now, before it is too late.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:56 pm |
  255. bijan hakimian

    no,It is right time The United States mind his own business and accept
    Iran as a neclear nation.The only reason u.s. tank did not move into pakistan.Because,it has a nuke!
    The only reason u.s. play with Iran right to defend itself is to please Isreal.It is a real shame for u.s. lawmakers ok to pay Isreal $1.6 billion
    tax dollors for Isreal create war for u.s. arms forces.It is rather very foolish to be silent and let jews tax us all.Bijan Hakimian California

    December 14, 2009 at 6:57 pm |
  256. Semo Rantamaki

    You mean invasion ? Like suggestions of Israel attacking Iran ? Yes, the post election crackdown on protesters in Iran was deplorable. But how many countries have Iran invaded ? Listen to Israel ? Bush hurried up ammunition delivery and delaying a cease-fire at the UN while Israel was bombing Lebanon about 3 years ago. The Bush Administration and then President elect Obama was quiet while while Israel was bombing Gaza. So, you can guess...

    Let's see. Israel has crushed the Palestinians, invaded Lebanon (1983), occupied Lebanon, bombed Lebanon recently (killing over a thousand Lebanese), blockaded Gaza, then bombed Gaza six months ago killing around 1400 Palestinians (hasn't let much supplies in since then, let alone letting them rebuild. Two weeks ago, Former President Carter said that Gazans were being treated like animals). All this to cover up the original injustice to carve up a territory, where the majority of the pouplation (about 2/3) in 1948 did not want the Palestinian territory divided.
    Now suggestions of attacking Iran...

    December 14, 2009 at 6:58 pm |
  257. Kyle in Halifax

    Perhaps its time for the United States to recognize the rights of sovereign states to create and maintain military advancement. This is not a question of safety but of hypocrisy, if the United States is so adamant about nuclear proliferation, then perhaps is should not only point the finger at Iran, but towards Israel and even more so, at themselves.

    December 14, 2009 at 6:59 pm |
  258. Alex- NB Canada

    Best take care of one country at a time...You can't win a fight against 3 or 4 different countries at once all by yourself! Best of Luck....I would say that Canada would help but we don't have the troops or equipment to get the job done either...We have few canoes left, a couple pigion carriers and some pea shooters left from WWII and that is about all we have to offer for assistance.

    December 14, 2009 at 7:00 pm |