NO EVIDENCE THAT IRAN WANTS NUCLEAR WEAPONS, NO REASON TO START WAR AGAINST IRAN

On World Focus tonight, Martin Savidge interviewed Martin Indyk, former ambassador to Israel in the Clinton administration, and talked about Obama's engagement with Iran. Indyk said that if Obama's negotiations fail, then all the world will come to see that there remains only a military option to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons. I object to this conclusion which seems to put an imprimatur on going to war against Iran.

For one thing no one has to date provided any credible evidence that Iran does want to make a bomb. The Israelis and the Bush gang just presumed that's what the Iranians were and are doing, but we know how far off their intelligence was about Saddam Hussein and the WMD. So far these guys just say that Iran is making a bomb and expect the whole world to believe them just because they say it. We need to suspect and reject such conclusionary assertions.

Second, even if the Iranians were developing a nuclear weapon, I argue that it is far better to allow Iran to have nuclear weapons than to start a world war whose repercussions would last at least 500 years and cause a permanent state of war between Iran and the West. Consider all the other countries that have nuclear weapons. Why must the US and Israel go to war over Iran having them?

No, there is no military option about Iran and its nuclear program. And people ("experts"?) like Martin Indyk are just war mongers for even countenancing the crazy idea.