Umm, gee...haven't we been 'talking' to the Iranians the past 3 years? Haven't the Brits, French, and Germans been trying "their way" the past few years?

You can see how effective that's been, Mr. Gumede.

Imposing sanction of Iran is on the best interest of Iran as it preppared for sanction not for stoping nuclear.
The sanction was imposed by India now it is the closet ally of US and also on Pak now it is dear and near of US and so on , on Iraq wihtout result.
If they west realy want to stop Iran nuclear prorgam first they have to stop Isreal from making it than the rest of the worl while it is allowed to the dear and near of US than it should be allowed to the enemy of US as well.

On April 26, 2006 Iran's supreme religious leader Khamenei stated:

"The Iranian nation and government advocate world peace and security and will never attack anyone in the future..."

According to the translation by Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to wipe Israel off the map because no such idiom exists in Persian" and "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."

On 20 February 2006, Iran's foreign minister denied that Tehran wanted to see Israel "wiped off the map," saying "Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament. "How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognise legally this regime," he said.

Iran's official position, which has not changed since the beginning of the revolution is that there are over 3 million Palestinians living as refugees outside Palestine. They should have the right to come back and along with the Jewish people participate in a referendum that will determine the future structure of a fair, equitable, non-racist, non-apartheid non-colonial government in Palestine.

Just as most nations have access to the Internet, the day will come when most nations will have access to nuclear technology.

Wake up, smell the coffee - get used to it!

On the issue of Iran, the question is - what can America possibly do?

1. Bomb the nuclear facilities.
2. Invade in Iran.
3. Use Diplomacy.

Options 1 and 2 have CONSEQUENCES - unless America recruits extra troops, an invasion is unlikely.

The US must not repeat the mistakes of Iraq in Iran. The major stakeholders are the Iranian people. The US must understand the aspirations of the Iranian people and not merely assume them (like in Iraq).

The revolution that brought in the Ayatollahs was a popular revolution. The election of Khatami was popular. Weapons do not kill, people do.

The question should not be whether Iran gets the bomb - IRAN WILL HAVE THE BOMB.The question should be - "how do we support the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people?".

Young Iranians like America, but they hate your present administration. Young Iranians are not anti-America, they are smart, hard-working and in many cases TIRED OF THE ISLAMIC REVOLUTION.

Has the West forgotten the model that worked so well against Communism?

Did anyone is the West seriously consider nukeing South Africa under Botha (and Apartheid)?

Did anyone in the West have a problem with South Africa having nuclear weapons?

Where the Republicans (Reagan and Bush 1) accused of "appeasing" the apartheid regime?

How was Apartheid destroyed?

How long did it take to dismantle apartheid?

Not by military force. The destruction of Apartheid was a long process - but most importantly it was organic.

Many in Africa were looking forward to the day when Nigeria would be strong enough to invade South Africa and "set the captives free". (Since no one in the West was willing to do so).

Thank God that was not needed.

The point is this. People should so all this "appeasement", "attack now", "gung ho" nonsense - and consider the deep lessons from South Africa.

Sometimes "appeasement" works. "Pre-emption" is not a fool proof doctrine.

I am talking to America now - Ever since WWII have a fought "good wars" and "bad wars". You know very well that the public cannot support a "bad war" (even if you have the best equipment in the World).

For the sake of peace on Earth - stop all this uneccessary sabre rattling.

Mr. Gumede is of the "Chaimberlain"esque mentality, most commonly known as the "Alice in Wonderland" approach to serious issues. His statement "Without first talking with the regime..." is reminiscent of the "peace in our time" cop out of previous appeasers of barbarians (Hitler, Stalin dot who was that Pulitzer winner of the NYT who lied, Osama dot idiot, Sadaam dot murderer, Idi Amin dot ...), and terrorists of others in the equivalent ilk. Yap, yap, yap, oops, how did that happen, why haven't you protected me? Same old garbage from those who refuse to face facts. Same old garbage from those who offer nothing as an alternative that faces reality. Same old garbage from the likes of the feckless French and the inept UN!

Here's the cycle: Iran trys to divide world opinion by pretending to desperately want talks, Russia and China hesitate imposing previously agreed upon sanctions, Iran refuses to stop enrichment during talks but says it's open to further discussion. US, UK, France threatens sanctions unless enrichment stops.

repeat...

Dear Sir,

Are you aware that over the last 3 years, France Germany and the UK have tirelessly and very seriously negotiated with Iran over the issue?

Are you privvy to the content of the proposed package? It would have been thoroughly irrisistable to any country genuinely seeking nuclear energy for civilian purposes only.

To say Iran is prepared to now hold "serious talks" is an affront to the efforts of the European nations who I can assure you have been extremely serious indeed over the last years.

There is widely held consensus that Iran seeks to postpone until they have produced a bomb. President Ahmadinejad of Iran also seeks to 'experience a world without the United States and Zionism' which is why in the foreseeable future they should never have a nuclear bomb.

We need an effective boycot including an oil boycot today, it will hurt much worse if we don't.