"Nuclear Standoff" with Iran

blueflame1 wrote:

Bushie this week called Ahmadinejad a nazi, a fascist and a totalitarian. All that's left if Bushie really wants to get nasty is to call Ahmadinejad BUSHitler. The letter Ahmadinejad wrote Bushie says let's Jews, Christians and Muslims get back to our mutual roots, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Bushie says I'll bomb you to smithereens. Some contrast. Easy to see who is the madman. And when it comes to who is the nazi Bushie's family have armed the likes of Hitler, Saddam and bin Laden and many others like them.

The US does not negotiate with terrorists....which shouldn't be confused with "the US doesn't negotiate".
I am unsure if Ahmadinejad has proven himself to be a de facto terrorist, but the policy remains in place to label him as such, and refuse negotiations.

From a TIME article:

Quote:

The U.S. knows it must avoid harsh rhetoric and ease any fears of military action in order to have any chance at getting Russia and China to agree to sanctions in the nuclear standoff

(Italic and bold added)

Source

Now, whether or not you agree with the contention that the US is avoiding harsh rhetoric in order to appease Russia and China is of peripheral import. This is not what is here being discussed.
That this conflict has already risen in the MSM to the level of a "nuclear standoff" is frightening.

In the same article, Bush stated:

Quote:

And we can imagine how much worse it would be if Iran were allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.

Is it not incorrect to refer to a nuclear standoff if Iran does not possess nuclear capabilities?....or is it a "nuclear standoff" becuase there is, 61 years after the initial atrocity, the looming threat of a nuclear attack by the United States.

This is a disagreement regarding non-existent/developmental technologies and surely not a "nuclear standoff". Is this just another bit of preemptive propaganda used to further demonize Ahmadinejad's Iran?

The question, then, is not "is Ahmadinejad a madman", nor is it "is Iran a supporter of terrorism" or "is the US softening their rehtoric to appease China and Russia's sympathies for Iran", rather, is it proper to label this conflict a "nuclear standoff"?