So that Aug. 31 U.N. deadline to halt uranium enrichment or face sanctions has turned out to mean little. And some experts believe Iran may be able to fend off serious international action for years more — as it continues its nuclear program.
In ten years, if present trends continue, I'm sure the EU will be giving Iran a deadline to halt their nuclear arsenal at 100 missiles and insist that they are absolutely forbidden to destroy any more Israeli cities.
I'm too cruel. It is the bleeding obvious, but not many people are really aware of it. It needs to be said that Iran doesn't give a rip about our faux deadlines. And yes, I use the French word on purpose.
This is the problem with collective security as represented by the UN. Iran wants nuclear weapons and will likely use them against America or Israel. Or, even if they don't use them, will use them as a shield to attack Israel and America at a sub-nuclear level without worrying about effective resistance.
So the international community could deal with Iran before Iran gets nukes and possibly face $200 per barrel oil for a while. Or the international community could simply watch and get all weepy when America or Israel gets hit with a nuke and maybe see $100 per barrel oil for a short time.
So the vast majority of the world that would not be targets of Iranian nukes figure they have little to gain for resisting Iran's nuclear drive.
Now, don't get me wrong. It is hard to deny the realism behind such a calculation. They may be right. But let's not get carried away and believe just because most of the world thinks this way it is by definition sacred as the wishes of the "international community."
Looking at our interests and not the interests of all the non-target oil users, I'd rather avoid a nuclear Iran and see oil hit $200 per barrel for a while.
But I guess I'm just being selfish to think that way.
