Should Iran have nuclear weapons? What should the US do?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by LSYouTiger, Feb 10, 2012.

  1. I'll start by saying: yes, nothing.
    Call me crazy, but this is the history behind the situation.

    Through WW2 and into the 50s, Iran was a democracy. Britian had a oil company in Iran and Britian was banking on oil, problem was Iran was getting screwed out of their own oil. So this happened:


    Yes, you read it correctly, The US and Britain overthrow a democracy. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi took power with the support of the US and modernized the nation and destroyed political opposition with SAVAK ( Iran's CIA).

    Everything was great and relation between the US and Iran were great. So great that the US started the Iranian nuclear research program.

    All was good until the late 70s when the Iranians finally revolted against Iranian government. Iran drafted a new Theocratic Constitution. All ties with the US were cut off.

    Iraq took this opportunity to take rich oilfields and get more access to the Persian Gulf. Iran was helped by Russia, Iraq was helped by US. This is when Saddam Hussein got power.

    Iran won. Iran and Russia became allies and Russia started to help out Iran's nuclear program.


    Rumors have spread that Iran is seeking Nuclear weapons. Why? well over the past decade, they Have seen the US rape the Middle East. Iranians have seen the US militarize Afghanistan and Iraq for a decade. Imagine for the past 10 year, there was military presence all around. You have to leave an extra 2 hours before work to account for the military checkpoints on your way to work.

    Iran doesn't want that shit, so how do they save themselves; Russia and China, and a nuclear weapon. US wont fuck with someone with a nuke, which will keep Iran safe. Now, Journalists have misquoted the president of Iran saying that he wants to kill everyone, when he actually wants to kill the Zionists whom want to spread Judaism, radically. That who he wants to kill, i understand why but i wouldn't kill them. The Zionists are terrorists, they need to be dealt with.

    Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    please don't allow war propaganda get to you and don't support the bullshit war your greedy government wants to get into for oil and profits.
     
  2. I agree. Our own greed caused this mess. If they want a nuke who are we to tell them no when the US has a stockpile. Hypocrisy at its best.
     
  3. As Ron Paul would say.. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgAnUTTp4ss]Ron Paul on Iran Fox News Republican Debate 12/15/11 - YouTube[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy3KDYE5KQE&feature=related]History of Iran- (a must see for any Ron Paul Supporter) WW3 Russia - YouTube[/ame]
     
  4. I agree also.

    If Iran want to develop Nuclear power or weapons then that is their business.

    The US should mind its own business and concentrate on securing its borders.
     
  5. Imo no one country should have access to ANYTHING that can destroy this planet. Shit we have enough to end it more then a few times over something like 8k nukes.
     

  6. Hey hey don't knock nukes.

    What if aliens invade and we need to implant a virus In their mothership while simultaneously blowing it up?
     
  7. should they have them? no.. no one should have them.

    what should the US do?

    they already did their part with weapons and aid to all of Iran's neighbors.. if iran is a threat to their neighbors, then their neighbors are perfectly capable of handing it.

    if Iran develops a long range nuke that can hit the US, and it's pointed at us.. then we go take it out.
     
  8. Difference is, Iran are run by a theocratic apocalyptic sect of mad mullahs. If Iran get their mitts on nuclear weapons, there is a good chance they will use them in their masterplan to bring back their messiah, the 12th imam - who like the return of Christ according to christinsanity won't show until the end-times. And nothing spells end-times quite like a mushroom cloud over a city.

    Besides, Iran is right smack in the middle of one of the most unstable regions in the world; the middle-east. Just about every regime there (sans Israel) is unstable. And the fissure lines run deep. Between ethnic groups, religious groups and ideological groups.

    That would not be a problem, were it not for the fact that most the worlds easily accessible deposits of energy (read: oil) is right under the feet of those oppressive regimes. So if Iran gets the bomb, a few other contestants will scramble for one as well. And sooner or later, a shooting war will erupt, and there goes the neighbourhood. That would be very bad locally, but in addition it would wreck havoc on global ecology as well as economy.

    To stop Iran getting nuclear wepons, might cost a few hundred or thousands of lives, and certainly a lot of funds. But failure to do so is potentially, I'd say probably, a disaster just waiting to happen. A disaster costing millions of lives, spreading radioactive fall-out throughout much of the world and our oceans, and costing untold trillions of dollars in direct damages alone.
     
  9. lol man, im sure they can stop a nuke a helluva lot faster/easier then we ever could.. if they can travel galaxies then you think some icbm will destroy em after all that time? :p
     
  10. I don't know why people get all paranoid when an islamic regime is apparantly trying to get nuclear arms. I don't care what you say North Korea is just as if not more bat shit insane as an islamic theocracy, and they already have the means for armmegeadon, yet no one even bats an eyelash at them.
     

  11. War propoganda can make people fear an "enemy" and make them want to wage war against an "enemy." propoganda makes it much harder to tell the truth, especially when the propoganda is false.

    Your right that the president is a little different. That's why the Iranian civilians hate him. They all wanted him gone, until the US came to strengthen the leader. Iranians don't want the leader in power or military presence from US. But they have no choice but to seek the help of their leader they hate. We strengthened the Iranian regime.

    Who said Iran would use a nuke? Sorry, but they are not that stupid and I can promise you that. They would get annihilated as they launched it.
    Even of they shot 1 nuke, Israel has middle defense systems do the nuke would be destroyed before it became dangerous. Iran won't launch multiple nukes, because they don't have the money to make hundreds or dozens of them.

    We made the middle east unstable. Israel has bombs, I don't see the entire middle east desperately trying to make a nuke. Only Iran, why? To keep US away and so israel doesn't dominate the area.

    I don't think it's right for thousands of soldiers or people to die because of oil- the reason we are there right now. The government won't tell you it's for oil but everyone knows it, that's why they say the enemy has a nuke. We did that with Iraq and we didn't find shit. That's why they say we think they are making a nuke do it doesnt look bad on our part when they don't have shit.

    We are going to go in and it's going to be another defeat- just like Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq. The best is we funded our enemies on all of those occasions, and Iran is not an exception.
     
  12. Anyone who thinks we should attack Iran with what we know currently should fuckin die. War mongering pieces of shit, all of them. If someone's offended by this, good.
     
  13. Seems like someone giving these guys $ so they can actually threaten someone, so then we can go in and kick ass, emerge as heroes.

    Hmmm
     
  14. #14 Zylark, Feb 11, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 11, 2012
    This entire post is what I'd call liberal naive twisted logic.

    First, you can't gurantee anything, much less Iran never using an atomic bomb. You wish for Iran not doing so, that I get. But you I presume are not a believer in an apocalyptic sect. You I presume are a materialist, like me. One who believe that this life matters. After-life or not is mere speculation, what our lives is now is reality. The religious nutters ruling Iran are not of that conviction. They believe this life do not matter, apart as a means to have a great time in the after-life.

    To make things worse, they know they are at the end of their rope. Their society is falling to tatters around them. Unemployment is skyrocketing. Inflation is at an all time high. The state-coffers are empty. The economy have ground to a halt. The people are revolting. The external pressure is mounting. These religious nutters are in a corner, and given the opportunity they would have no qualms about taking as many as possible down the drain with them.

    Right now, that is limited to a few thousands in a revolt. Given a nuclear weapon, that can easily become a few millions when lashing out... And there is no reliable defense against ICBMs, even crude ones like Iran have. And who says they'd deliver a nuke by missile? They could just as easily get it into just about any harbour by smuggling it on a ship flying some neutral flag by means of a chain of shell-companies. International customs is not terribly efficient. It is why the drug trade for one is quite lucrative...

    Iran getting a nuke, is not about oil. It is about the lives of millions, global ecology, averting a disaster.

    Just as you don't give kids guns, you don't allow apocalyptic regimes to have nukes. It's a very simple concept.

    Ideally ofcourse, no country should have nukes; but as long as that pandoras box is open, the very least we could do is ensure as few countries as possible do. Now, I'm not worried with the US, Russia, China, France or the UK having nukes. Not the least. I'm not happy about India or Pakistan having them, and North-Korea is cause for nightmares.

    But allowing Iran to have nukes, with the present regime, is pure madness. If it can be averted, it should.
     
  15. [quote name='"Zylark"']

    This entire post is what I'd call liberal naive twisted logic.

    First, you can't gurantee anything, much less Iran never using an atomic bomb. You wish for Iran not doing so, that I get. But you I presume are not a believer in an apocalyptic sect. You I presume are a materialist, like me. One who believe that this life matters. After-life or not is mere speculation, what our lives is now is reality. The religious nutters ruling Iran are not of that conviction. They believe this life do not matter, apart as a means to have a great time in the after-life.

    To make things worse, they know they are at the end of their rope. Their society is falling to tatters around them. Unemployment is skyrocketing. Inflation is at an all time high. The state-coffers are empty. The economy have ground to a halt. The people are revolting. The external pressure is mounting. These religious nutters are in a corner, and given the opportunity they would have no qualms about taking as many as possible down the drain with them.

    Right now, that is limited to a few thousands in a revolt. Given a nuclear weapon, that can easily become a few millions when lashing out... And there is no reliable defense against ICBMs, even crude ones like Iran have. And who says they'd deliver a nuke by missile? They could just as easily get it into just about any harbour by smuggling it on a ship flying some neutral flag by means of a chain of shell-companies. International customs is not terribly efficient. It is why the drug trade for one is quite lucrative...

    Iran getting a nuke, is not about oil. It is about the lives of millions, global ecology, averting a disaster.

    Just as you don't give kids guns, you don't allow apocalyptic regimes to have nukes. It's a very simple concept.

    Ideally ofcourse, no country should have nukes; but as long as that pandoras box is open, the very least we could do is ensure as few countries as possible do. Now, I'm not worried with the US, Russia, China, France or the UK having nukes. Not the least. I'm not happy about India or Pakistan having them, and North-Korea is cause for nightmares.

    But allowing Iran to have nukes, with the present regime, is pure madness. If it can be averted, it should.[/quote]

    Obviously they shouldn't have nukes, but no one should. I don't like the idea of Iran having nukes but we don't even know if they are trying to get one at the moment. It's all fear mongering and I think Israel and the rest of the Middle East should resolve the problem should it even arise.
     
  16. Why do we want more nukes on this planet?
     
  17. But we do know Irans nuclear program is military in nature, not civilian. From a number of very obvious avenues.

    First and foremost, Iran do not need nuclear power. Iran sits on a huge pile of hydrocarbons (coal, oil and natural gas) for one thing, and in the more mountainous regions, hydropower by means of dam-projects. If generation of electricity was the issue, they could do a lot of things that would generate orders of magnitude more electricity for a fraction of the cost of a nuclear programme.

    Since the theocracy was introduced in the counter-revolution in 1979, not a single new refinery have been built. Not a single oil or gas powered electricity plant. Not a single hydro-electric dam. Even basic maintanance of existing oil and gas facilities is severly lacking. To such a degree that Iran is actually an importer of refined oil products, such as gasoline and diesel.

    As Christopher Hitchens said, in a totalitarian regime everything falls to bits, except the military and the security regime. And when a totalitarian regime pours billions into a nuclear project, it is a pretty safe bet the purpose is not to provide electricity for your average punter to cook up some noodles in a hurry.

    And then you got the rest. Failure to cooperate with international monitors, the AIEA. Not to mention moving much of their Uranium refining facilities underground. And ofcourse their hostile stance, and the plenty of threats made.

    So that Iran is working towards a bomb is pretty much beyond any doubt. The question is, can we afford to do nothing about it?

    (not that nothing is beeing done. a lot of covert measures have already played out. a few have even reached the newspapers. like stuxnet and some assasinations. who knows what else.)
     
  18. I find it extremely ironic that the only country to have ever used an atomic bomb is preaching about the extremeness of other cultures.

    Who's to say you won't be the next ones to use it again? Should the rest of the world gang up on you because you're the most likely one to use it, probability-wise?

    The AIEA means nothing. How would you feel if a coordinated movement like NATO was bombing all the countries around you for not bowing to their will and selling oil for gold? I'd feel pretty nervous and not want any international (that's what NATO is) institution from getting inside my borders.

    Iran has every right to want a nuclear weapon and I have absolutely no fear that under normal circumstances they would use one. If the Western military is arrogant enough to think it can assert its tyrannous ways on Iran then I hope they do set it off. I don't want to live in a world where people just stand by and watch hundreds of thousands of middle eastern people die because of what one man supposedly 'plotted' against 3000 of your people.

    On the topic of nuclear power, it's an incredibly efficient source of energy and produces byproducts that don't harm the atmosphere, although take an incredible amount of time to decay. There are upsides to both forms of energy, however fission reactions are much easier to find resources for, with the eventual cost of production being lower.

    Face it, Iran is acting rationally and defensively. Considering that, I think it's damn unlikely that they're a suicidal race of extremists.

    Quit letting your racist propaganda fill your head with nonsense.
     
  19. #19 Zylark, Feb 11, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 11, 2012
    Ah, the racist card. Was anticipating that. Good for you to fall into the expected pattern.

    Now, if you have not been keeping attention, there is some strife inside Iran. The regime is not what you'd call popular. Hell, even Bush the lesser had more support than the mullahs running Iran, even on his worst days. And I know I am for one a great supporter of Iranians overthrowing their oppressive regime. So how do me supporting the people of Iran make me a racist? I would really like to know.

    How do me opposing an oppressive regime, a theocratic dictatorship with nuclear ambitions, make me a racist? Again, I would really like to know.

    And FYI: My nephew is half Iranian... From his father I know a bit of how life is inside Iran. The demise of that regime would not come a day to soon.

    But I guess wanting some freedom for the people of Iran is a racist view I should not hold, because as we all know, the Iranian regime is against Israel and the US and the West, and that is all that matters. And those that disagree are racist.

    Right...

    Now do me a favour, and try not to label people you know nothing of. And try not to cast your bigoted little capitalist hating view as anything else but lazy egotism. You know Irans regime is oppressive and tyrranical, I know it. You know you wouldn't last a week in Iran speaking your conviction, and neither would I. You know they shouldn't have nuclear bombs, I know it.

    You just like someone opposing capitalism, and in this case it is radical islam as represented by Iran. My enemies enemy is my friend twisted logic. Why you don't like capitalism, I don't know. Perhaps you have yet to actually make an honest living :)
     

  20. No I can't guarantee anything, no one can. Not even the US government can guarantee shit, like that Iran IS building a bomb. US said Iraq had WMD, we found none. So then we had to stay there for 10 years promoting "democracy." The US isn't even a fucking democracy.

    Yes life matters a lot on earth. We only have one, but what about the 1,000,000 lives that were lost since the invasion of Iran. For the 5000 soldiers killed, 1,000,000 others had to die as well. Government doesn't want you knowing about that, but fortunately the Pentagon Papers were released. Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Now picture yourself in Iraq for the past 10 years. They have houses, and pools and shit. Look at Baghdad, Iraq: Baghdad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Now put several thousand soldiers on every corner of that city and some checkpoints. You live in the suburbs and drive to your office in Baghdad, you left two hours early Because of those checkpoints.
    Its just like the US having checkpoints in every city to make sure no terrorists go in. And then having a lot of people dieing.

    Now your Iran, Iraq just got raped by the US. They dont want the US in there cities and murdering people. So they go to Russia for help and they get a nuke. US wont fuck with Nukes. Unless they can stop it first.
    So why should Iran stop building a bomb that will protect them from US. They got help too, and once they have the bomb, US wont invade.

    The bomb is for protection against a tyrannt (US). Not to be used aggressively. Israel was out of control with their nukes, they started invading countries and they couldn't be stopped because they had nukes.

    Iranian bomb will balance out everything out, no country will be too powerful. If we support Israel and stop Iran from making a bomb, then Israel will dominate, and the Arab league will continue to attack US.



    So why wouldn't they want to kill the people who caused society to fall around them. The US started this whole mess.
    If we wouldn't have got involved in the first place, they wouldn't "hate" US. So why should we go into Iran and piss more people off, only to create another generation of hatred for US.

    Take them out of the corner and they have no reason to attack. We pursue Iran, we get blasted in the face.
    We are fighting the second generation of Iraqis that hate US now.



    Iran is no where near those capabilities. Remember, we think they may be building a bomb. They cant fly something they don't have.



    I dont want Iran to have a nuke. I just don't want the US telling them they can't have a nuke by using military force. OR by sanctions. Let them have the nuke to protect the millions of lives that would be lost in the war with the US. That one bomb may only kill 80,000 and that is IF it is successful. so we are trying to save 80K by stopping a bomb, but killing over 1,000,000 in the process.


    You don't give guns to kids. And your also not supposed to chear on bullies. The chears for the bully is like money for the US. It just keeps us going.

    I agree, that no countries should have nukes. Its stupid, but we live in a world were nuclear weapons are a major threat. Why stop a country from building a nuke, who is getting backed by a super power.
    Going into Iran starts WW3. Russia and China both back Iran, because they too don't want to see another US massacre.
     

Share This Page