NO WAR WITH IRAN OVER NUCLEAR WEAPONS

I wanted to comment on this opinion piece from yesterday's The New York Times on future U.S. policy towards Iran.

Carol Giacomo writes:

"It is a frightening notion, but it is not just the trigger-happy Bush administration discussing — if only theoretically — the possibility of military action to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

"Of course, no president or would-be president ever takes the military option off the table, and Barack Obama and John McCain are no exception.

"What is significant is that inside Washington’s policy circles these days — in studies, commentaries, meetings, Congressional hearings and conferences — reasonable people from both parties are seriously examining the so-called military option, along with new diplomatic initiatives."

I object to Carol Giacomo's notion that no president would rule out the "military option." Of course the military option means thousands and hundreds of thousands of people killed, not only soldiers, but women, children, innocent civilians. In other words, all out war.

All out war or even a limited one can never be justified. The idea of destroying any nuclear arms capability of Iran is not worth the life of one Iranian or one American.

Who are these guys that would trade Iranian lives for the sake of preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons?

Giacomo quotes Dennis Ross, former negotiator in Serbia and Bosnia:

"Mr. Ross, who was top Mideast negotiator for the first President George Bush and for President Bill Clinton, said that in the prelude to Iraq, nearly all of the talk focused on military action. He says this time experts are taking a harder, more systematic look at all options — including force — because diplomatic efforts have failed to slow Iran’s rush to master nuclear technology.

"“I want to concentrate the mind and make people understand, ‘Look, this is serious and you don’t want to be left with only those two choices’ ” — war or living with an Iranian bomb, he said."

Giacomo's article seems to be saying that even a president Obama would decide on initiating a war against Iran.

Any war against Iran would be catastrophic for the United States. The whole Islamic world would take up arms against Americans whereever they might be. The would be hatred toward the U.S. for the next 500 years. And any attack would just make Iran more radicalized in its outlook towards Israel and the West.

The very concept of war against Iran should be taken off the table. Instead of looking at Iran as the "enemy," we need a foreign policy that looks at Iran and all countries as partners and respects them for their tradition, culture, language and history. In other words, diplomacy instead of dropping bombs.