So says John Bolton.

"It's been conclusively proven Iran is not going to be talked out of its nuclear programme. So to stop them from doing it, we have to massively increase the pressure.

"If we can't get enough other countries to come along with us to do that, then we've got to go with regime change by bolstering opposition groups and the like, because that's the circumstance most likely for an Iranian government to decide that it's safer not to pursue nuclear weapons than to continue to do so. And if all else fails, if the choice is between a nuclear-capable Iran and the use of force, then I think we need to look at the use of force."

President George W Bush privately refers to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has pledged to wipe Israel "off the map", as a 21st Century Adolf Hitler and Mr Bolton, who remains a close ally of Vice President Dick Cheney, said the Iranian leader presented a similar threat

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../wbolton16.xml

*looks for SPF 45 and checks holiday insurance*

Check

Here we go again

I'll pack me webbin'.............

Stand down... he'll have forgotten what he said by tomorrow.

Op PERSIAN FREEDOM draws ever closer

<sigh>

No need to worry, Iran if they do have a nuclear programme will certainally use it first on their near neighbours and so will do the job for us, when they run out of nukes then we step in and do the business

Just to add to the fun.

The International Atomic Energy Commission has determined that Iran, having solved its technical problems, is enriching uranium at a much faster rate than ever before.

Next stop: weapons-grade material - and a crisis that threatens not only the region, but the global economy as well.

Iran's ability to produce its own nuclear fuel is what Israel has repeatedly called "the point of no return" - a view all but confirmed by IAEA Director Mohammed ElBaradei. Now, he said, "it is simply a question of perfecting that knowledge. People will not like to hear it, but that's a fact."

Time to dust of the old Active Edge plans perhaps??

ok, a nuclear armed Iran would be VERY bad, but also, I expect that if we (the rest of the world) do nothing to stop them getting the bomb, the cork will be well and truely out of the bottle and many more countries will go nuclear. (especially arab states, who would not appreciate persian dominance in the region.)

At present the ecomomic and political costs outweigh the benefits of developing a nuclear capability, if that is seen not to be the case, and more countries are arming, then there is nothing to stop proliferation.

I hope we are stocking up on TLAMs and 'bunker busting' bombs.

And contrary to a previous post, I expect that the first use will be against either, Israel, New York or London.

Ski.

Israel will not let Iran become a nuclear threat.

Well, if we have to attack Iran, fair enough. But can it wait a couple of weeks? I'm a bit busy at the moment and it's not at all convenient.