Good stuff from Simplicius, the most astute analysis of the psychology of the situation I've seen. Iran may have legal justification for a pre-emptive strike against the forces being built up against it, but they will be hampered by a perceived need to live up to their morality and being seen to be in the right by international bodies like the UN (as defanged and irrelevant as they have become). So they go through the charade of negotiations because they feel they have to tick that box, even though the US has completely disregarded diplomacy when in its interests to do so, indeed using it as a cover for treachery.

Comments are interesting. I found myself in agreement with this one by Eric Basciano:

'While Iran may be legally entitled to strike first in the face of an imminent threat from the US and Israel, they would be wiser to wait until the US planes are in the air. With the new Chinese long range radar and their connection to the Beidoo satellite system Iran will have plenty of warning and a reasonable chance of surviving, and maybe even blunting, a first strike. In the eyes of most of the world Iran's retaliatory actions will then be justified, and these actions should be severe including attacks on US naval assets.'

That and with the comments arguing for a pre-emptive blockade of Hormuz. Though the consequences might be too damaging for Iran itself for that to be a viable first move. Many/most of the other countries that would be hurt probably deserve it, though as ever it will be regular people who suffer most... Either way we should really be out in the streets to try and stop this from happening in the first place.

cheers,
I