Iran

**Hedons** · 09-25-2009, 09:53 PM

Do you think Iran has the right to develop nuclear weapons?

-Hedons

zerodown · 09-25-2009, 10:06 PM

Every nation should, it would level the playing field, we're all humans, whatever turns out at the end, life will go on, don't fear change.

Would you go on a killing spree just because you have a machine gun?

Terry · 09-25-2009, 10:32 PM

No one has the right to develop them, us included

**Maturin** · 09-25-2009, 10:52 PM

Nope.

kameelyun · 09-25-2009, 11:29 PM

I'm with Terry.

We're STILL the only ones who have used them.

morphone-maniac · 09-25-2009, 11:33 PM

No I don't belive any nation should have the ability to build nukes any more. What we need to do is get rid of them all because the only thing that would happen if one was ever used again would be a chain reation of nuke launches. If you've ever played fallout 3 you see that nuclear war isn't a nice picture.

Ego Tripping · 09-25-2009, 11:50 PM

We have the right to do pretty much anything if we feel the cause is worthy. The question that faces each person, state, country, nation etc.. is "is this in the highest good for everyone?" I feel it's a duty we all should carry as human beings, but I understand how this notion can be abused to convince people to support something that actually contradicts the intention. The road to hell, as they say. I feel that Iran pursuing nuclear technology at this point is more of an obvious flex of muscle than actual necessity. While I do not support military action of any kind, it's a bit clear that Iran is acting irrational. I feel the USA's irrational manuevers in the region tend to justify the rouge behavior that Iran demonstrates, but I feel they are seizing this time to create a window of opportunity to accelerate their power gain over the region. At the same time, I feel Israel goes unpunished for the crimes they commit in response to the situation they find themselves in.

The fact that Israel posseses these weapons makes the situation all the more complicated. The answer is not to not let Iran develop nuclear weapons but to show Iran that the world is going to dismantle them to allow for a more level playing field. Which I am glad to see, is something that is actually not only the books but is now an actual priority set in place as of recently. If they don't desire to comply, then time will tell. Iran knows they are out-powered and out-numbered. What I feel they need is coaching, not intimidation, as that will only accelerate the already tense situation...much like coaxing a bank robber not to shoot the hostage rather than scare the shit out of them if they don't drop the weapon. Diplomacy, at this point, needs to be of the highest priority...no matter how irrational the situation may seem.

John F. Kerry · 09-26-2009, 01:06 AM

anybody who relates the fact that israel has nuclear weapons and has for 40 years and yet no nation neither saudi arabia nor yemen nor egypt has been able to claim that it was ever openly threatened or even possibly targeted by israel in any way whatsoever except defensive - contrasted to "wiping nations off the map" by iran.

but nonetheless, anybody who links up israels longstanding nuclear weapons with iran a crazy theocracy that is not representative of its people trying to secretly create a nuke program from AQ khans nuclear walmart is just not being fair or even coherent- the point as many know is that once a nation gets nuclear weapons they wont give them up - thus its horrible that n korea has them- horrible that pakistan has them- and undesireable that israel, india, america, russia, etc etc have them...

so for Iran to have them is as bad as it is for all the rest PLUS the crazy world threatening power that iran is makes it doubly or 20x-ly so ....

the idea that u can link the 2 israel and iran makes about as much sense as saying that germany and japan should both eat rice and noodles because they were both in ww2.

anybody who doesnt admit this is trying to do a bait and swtich . blame anyone for everything u want but dont let iran get nuclear weapons because israel and pakistan and india and 5 european countries and america have them.... that doesnt make any sense at all- instead lets back up the machinery and get rid of them - no one needs nukes- america doesnt have any power because it has nukes- russia didnt avoid losing the cold war because of its nukes- the ONLY PEOPLe, the ONLY ONLY PEOPLE who really would like nukes are crazy death-craving people (like for example islamic terrorists) - and so anybody who cant do a simple 1 + 1 = 2 either has an ulterior motive or is pretty stupid.

stoneric · 09-26-2009, 07:04 AM

Originally Posted by John F. Kerry

anybody who relates the fact that israel has nuclear weapons and has for 40 years and yet no nation neither saudi arabia nor yemen nor egypt has been able to claim that it was ever openly threatened or even possibly targeted by israel in any way whatsoever except defensive - contrasted to "wiping nations off the map" by iran.

but nonetheless, anybody who links up israels longstanding nuclear weapons with iran a crazy theocracy that is not representative of its people trying to secretly create a nuke program from AQ khans nuclear walmart is just not being fair or even coherent- the point as many know is that once a nation gets nuclear weapons they wont give them up - thus its horrible that n korea has them- horrible that pakistan has them- and undesireable that israel, india, america, russia, etc etc have them...

so for Iran to have them is as bad as it is for all the rest PLUS the crazy world threatening power that iran is makes it doubly or 20x-ly so ....

the idea that u can link the 2 israel and iran makes about as much sense as saying that germany and japan should both eat rice and noodles because they were both in ww2.

anybody who doesnt admit this is trying to do a bait and swtich . blame anyone for everything u want but dont let iran get nuclear weapons because israel and pakistan and india and 5 european countries and america have them.... that doesnt make any sense at all- instead lets back up the machinery and get rid of them - no one needs nukes- america doesnt have any power because it has nukes- russia didnt avoid losing the cold war because of its nukes- the ONLY PEOPLe, the ONLY ONLY PEOPLE who really would like nukes are crazy death-craving people (like for example islamic terrorists) - and so anybody who cant do a simple 1 + 1 = 2 either has an ulterior motive or is pretty stupid.

Right. Everything israel does is "defensive" so of course none it's neighbors have ever been threatened. You must be joking to say israel doesn't use it's overwhelming military might to bully its neighbors. And thanks for bringing the "wiping nations off the map" bullshit again. When in doubt.

israel's government is not representative of its people. No government is. A crazy jewish state having nukes is just as scary as a crazy theocracy having them.

How in the fuck is Iran a threat to the world? Quit equating israel as the rest of the world. And if you say crazy enough, I guess everyone will believe you.

Your anology about linking israel and iran makes no sense.

What machinary are we talking about to keep Iran from getting nukes? More war? That'll work. Instead of having the possibility of a complete disaster, we'll be assured of one.

Bad dog · 09-26-2009, 07:13 AM

The world powers are totally against Nuclear prolification.
The rule is No one new gets the bomb.
Membership to the nuclear club is closed.

If Iran can have the bomb, then why not Germany or Japan? Or Syria or anybody.

In the meantime the only countries that have the bomb are USA, UK, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan and Israel.

This is already too many.

The Iranian bomb is merely a new part of the Muslim / Christian war that has been going on since the before Crusades. The Muslims are starting to gain strength again the Christians are looking for a fight.

stoneric · 09-26-2009, 07:16 AM

By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 18, 2006

Just after the lightning takeover of Baghdad by U.S. forces three years ago, an unusual two-page document spewed out of a fax machine at the Near East bureau of the State Department. It was a proposal from Iran for a broad dialogue with the United States, and the fax suggested everything was on the table -- including full cooperation on nuclear programs, acceptance of Israel and the termination of Iranian support for Palestinian militant groups.

But top Bush administration officials, convinced the Iranian government was on the verge of collapse, belittled the initiative. Instead, they formally complained to the Swiss ambassador who had sent the fax with a cover letter certifying it as a genuine proposal supported by key power centers in Iran, former administration officials said.

The Rev · 09-26-2009, 07:49 AM

It doesn't matter if they have the right or not. The group of people with the power of mass destruction will grow whether action is taken or not, rights are present or not, the people of the world or the world's powers like it or not. It's like trying to stop drug use. Where there is demand, supply will find it. And there is alot of demand among the power seeking for ultimate power.

The Rev

**Hedons** · 09-26-2009, 08:18 AM

This of course then begs the question of whether anyone has the right to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

-Hedons

pacman · 09-26-2009, 09:00 AM

the iranian people are cool. their leaders are gonna get them all killed. how do you take out a government without bringing war upon the people? we did a HORRIBLE job trying to do that in Iraq...

Its up to the Iranian people to bring some sort of revolution...but they would be slaughtered eventually. What are we going to do?

Makros_01 · 09-26-2009, 10:22 AM

"the point as many know is that once a nation gets nuclear weapons they wont give them up - thus its horrible that n korea has them- horrible that pakistan has them- and undesireable that israel, india, america, russia, etc etc have them..." J.F.K (the yahookan)

....you forgot china. do you think china is nuke free?and its not etc etc. there are few enough to be able to list as a whole. there is no ET FUCKIN C

why is it horrible that india and pakistan have them? they never used them; in fact it seems to have stabilized the border wars they were having. And only UNDESIRABLE that the USA have them (the only people to have destroyed civilian populations with them! 100,000 even!)?

to answer hedons qu. i think iran is right to act and do as it has and will continue to. They are acting with insolence, sure. But you know, most kids who are bullied act like that as they find their bodies filling out to catch up with the bully. The sociology is the same; the equations are just a little more complicated.
No one can hold the world to ransom with a nuke. its the easiest way to get 217 countries on your back at once. even the US couldnt get away with a usage. not even one. so they made dep. uranium... bunker busters.. and they get lambasted for that too, and in the end, we all see it didnt even win the war. only lost US credit.

I want Iran with Nukes! I really do. every continent should have at least 2 forces that oppose each other idealogically that are nuclear powers. it works. we all know it works. if we get rid of every weapon of mass destruction, we'd just have what we had before. endless war (and if you look at history, its startling the difference)

we didnt get here through peace love and understanding. i concede that to JFK (not singling you out.no offence, weve just been doing this for a few threads). but we DID get here through the cold war. it was an extremely effective way to prevent millions being killed at war, now its only 10s of thousands. sounds cold and pragmatic, but its true.. its better now than then
to prevent others getting the balance in their own areas will only serve to highten the desire for stupidity.
and hey, we all know the basics and we're all human.
as for iran being a gov that doesnt represent the people?
well you know what
neither does the US gov represent ITS people. tell me im wrong. hell i dont even think the votes get counted right in your country.
over here
we still use paper, and if i wanted to . i could personally take a table and count some. you guys dont even know what the fuck is going on on your vote day.
even the independant electoral bodies found 'significant irregularities' in the 2000 bush gore election. your courts gave you your president.
if iran did that, youd condem them!
just think about that!

ionlylooklazy · 09-26-2009, 10:41 AM

Regardless of their rights, the more entities with nukes the higher the probability one gets used. Iran isn't the friendliest nation either.

JcP · 09-26-2009, 10:55 AM

they have the "right" to. And I cannot STAND the fact that we are sitting on the world's largest supply of nukes and then have the nerve to say to other countries (who we deem "enemies") that they can't.

If we got rid of our nukes, I'd feel far more in line with non-proliferation actions. As it is now, it just seems like a power-grab

**Hedons** · 09-26-2009, 11:19 AM

Iran has just as much "right" to have nuclear weapons as any other nation. What the origin of such rights is I don't know. But in any case, sure, who is to say nation A can have them but nation B cannot.

Whether or not the IAEA, the UN, or Team America World police has the right to stop them is another story. The rhetoric is heating up though and it is just a matter of time until action is taken to prevent Iran from making nukes. I can't think of an action though that does anything more than to delay their progress. As long as Iran does not see that having nukes is not in their best interest, this issue will never be truly resolved.

Of course this is all based upon whether or not we believe that Iran is really trying to build nuclear weapons. Are we naive to think that their nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only? Or are we naive to believe "intelligence" assessments which say that their equipment is for enriching uranium to weapons grade material?

How do we know that this isn't an Iraq-esque WMD situation all over again?

Fool me once, shame on you... Fool me twice, shame on me.

-Hedons

Bad dog · 09-26-2009, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by The Rev

It doesn't matter if they have the right or not. The group of people with the power of mass destruction will grow whether action is taken or not, rights are present or not, the people of the world or the world's powers like it or not. It's like trying to stop drug use. Where there is demand, supply will find it. And there is alot of demand among the power seeking for ultimate power.

The Rev

I reckon that possession / production of a plutonium enriched nuclear bombs is slightly more serious than drugs.

The big fear of the west is nuclear terrorism, not a nuclear Iran.
The eight countries with bombs have managed to keep them safely for half a century. The all have a common interest in not having terrorists with a nuclear capacity.

Can the same be said of Iran?

John F. Kerry · 09-26-2009, 11:23 AM

these people who say that iran has the right to develop nuclear weapons i dont think even understand what they are talking about.

do u guys know what the NPT is? and what it says? iran has the right to peaceful nuclear energy provided it follows all rules and safeguards set up by the IAEA (which worries me enough as it is)

but some of u are like oh well why shouldnt they develop nuclear weapons they have the right to do that- it makes me realize how truly uninformed some people are. as hedons said who gave them that "right"? certainly not the international treaties in force, certainly not anyone who doesnt want to die in a nuclear conflict, so what are u talking about?