Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, 32, has been the fifth scientist killed in dirty war since 2007. A sixth survived when they saw that they had put a flap bomb on the door, jumping out of a jump. They were all the leaders of the teams that are developing atomic energy for the Tehran Government.

Who killed them? Hillary Clinton has said that the United States "has nothing to do with" the country. On the other hand, there is no doubt about the responsibility of Israel, with or without the company of the secret services of the United States and other major powers.

Journalist Scott Shane, who writes in the New York Times, went to ask Patrick Clawson, director of the Iranian section of the Institute for Near East Policy in Washington, linked to the Israeli lobby. “I have often been asked – derantzu Clawson – when Israel is going to attack Iran. And I say, two years ago.”

For Clawson and other supporters of Israel, sabotage and targeted killings are the right way, clandestine wars, and not the major air strikes. "This would trigger nationalist reactions in Iran, reinforcing the regime. However, with clandestine attacks, Iran is made to see how expensive it is to get nuclear weapons.” So is the war going on and the round of negotiations is over?

In the analysis of Alain Gresh, who is closely monitoring the Middle East at Le Monde Diplomatique, the European Union would be aligned with Israel, headed by Nicolas Sarkozy, who would seek to attack immediately: “It is in the most closed position, rather than facilitating dialogue and trying to help. And he wants to hear a word about the Middle East without nuclear weapons, because that should make Israel reject the atomic bomb.”

Barack Obama would be in a much more ambiguous position than the White House. This is how Gresh interprets the contradictory statements that U.S. leaders make from week to week: today they say that Iran has an atomic bomb, tomorrow not... They would like to see, in secret, a dialogue started with Iran. In this indirect diplomacy, Gresh understands the journey made in January by the President of the Tehran Parliament, Ali Larijani, to Turkey, where he stated that they want to negotiate with the Western powers.

The question is: Have the murders of Iranian scientists been committed individually by Israel? This and much more has recently been suggested by Mark Perry in the prestigious Foreign Policy magazine, collecting the words of the agents of the cia. In other words, Mossad has taken advantage of the Israeli secret service to push his strategy forward from the people of the cia.

The dirty war inside Iran has been carried out by the Israelis using a local armed group, Jundallah. Don't be confused with the left-wing Mujahidin group: Jundallah proclaims the defence of the Sunni of Baluchistan. The United States regards it as a terrorist organisation and says it has support in Pakistan.

Several CIA agents denounce Mark Perry that in his relations with Jundallah militants they have appeared as members of the Cia. Washington's leaders leave the Israelis, but the members of the cia get nervous about these operations under false flag or false flag. In the end, the mosses are the ones who do the misdeeds and those of the CIA are the culprits in front of the enemy.

Remember that 1988?

The citizen who reads the international section carefully in the newspapers has reason to be concerned about the tension between the powers of Iran and the Western powers. What is going to happen in the whole vast region of Pakistan to Lebanon, to Morocco, which we perhaps have at our doorstep, if they attack Iran with bombs?

However, when the knot seems insoluble, some work in the hope of catching the end of the solution. Paul Rogers, a professor at the Department of Peace Studies at Bradford University, is one of them.
Rogers has launched The Iran complex: why history matters at Open Democracy. It tries to look at the roots of Iran's choice of nuclear, because its understanding can help prevent war. Here's Rogers' arguments.

Many Israelis and hawks in the United States. They see him as a weak Obama, because, in addition to not attacking, he allows Iran to take more and more force in Iraq. But not all of them realize, to Roger, that the parium for Iranian nuclear is not just a matter for the authorities.

For four thousand years Persia has maintained its cultural independence. For many Iranians, the country with 80 million inhabitants today has been the center of global civilization. Europeans never colonized them. By the 20th century they began to modernize, but it was foreigners who blocked it: In 1925, Mohammad Mossadegh was assaulted by the British and American emperor Reza Shah Pahlavi; in 1953, Mohammad Mossadegh was sunk by MI6 and the CIA to control oil.

“These feelings exalted the revolution of 1978-79. History leads to a mix of lack of security and self-confidence in Iran’s political culture. (...) The country’s commitment to civil nuclear has become a symbol of modernity that will not be easily rejected, not even in view of the regression of nuclear energy in the post-Fukushima environment”.

In this environment, the Revolutionary Guard has a special importance. This was on the front lines of the army that faced Saddam Hussein in the 1988-88 war. Those who are at the forefront of this body today were young soldiers in war and have recalled the experience of that time.

When in April 1988 the Iranians won that cruel war, the United States entered to help Iraq. These two facts are witnesses. One, the Kurdish people of Halabja, attacked by chemical weapons by Saddam Hussein, killing 3,000 people, and the Reagan administration succeeded in making the world less important. And the second, when the tank battle was over, the U.S. Navy attacked the scarce Iranian ships, destroying three ships and a couple of oil rigs. As he suggests, that summer the USS Vincennes paquebot flew through the air to an Iranian Airbus, killing over 290 passengers.

More than two decades later, Rogers sees the distrust that these events cause as the main obstacle for Iran to negotiate with the United States: “Because building trust is necessary for a peaceful commitment.”